||9.3.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2020-03-29
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to fail
|1
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
I can't reproduce that with x86-64 cross compiler.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91601
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94363
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94386
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at linux dot
vnet.ibm.com
--- Com
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 94386 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94394
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
If I remember correctly kernel implements its own "runtime library" libgcov, so
I would expect a crash somewhere in it. Anyway, a reasonable reproducer would
be needed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94314
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
> It should be sufficient to check whether they have the same DECL_CONTEXT.
This seems to work. I'm testing a patch candidate.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94394
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to ammy.yi from comment #3)
> Actually, there is some random kernel panic here.
>
> The following steps may reproduce this issue:
>
> 1. Enable gcov in kconfig
> 2. build kernel and boot to system
|1
CC||markeggleston at gcc dot
gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work||9.3.0
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94389
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-03-30
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
I can confirm on LNT znver2 machine, but the bisection points to a different
commit:
https://lnt.opensuse.org
NCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94402
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 48144
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48144&action=edit
vect-8.f90.161t.vect dump file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94402
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94402
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Or scan for vectorized 22-23 loops?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94402
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94402
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org, segher at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: powerpc64-linux-gnu
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94307
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Kees Cook from comment #5)
> Hi! I recently learned that Clang has -fsanitizer-minimal-runtime that is
> very close to what I was expecting to use:
>
> https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45295
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87222
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
May I please ping this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92626
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 70390, which changed state.
Bug 70390 Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] internal compiler error: in
copy_loop_close_phi_args, at graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:2114
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70390
|--- |FIXED
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #18 from Martin Liška ---
I can confirm it works with the following releases:
8.1.0 (406c2abec3f998e9)(02 May 2018 10:13): [took: 0.435s] result: OK
8.2.0 (ddeb81e76461fc00)(26 Jul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94271
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94168
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> I read Josephs comment so that GCC is correct to reject the code and Martins
> quoting of the original testcase shows it's likely a genuine bug in the
> program (
||2020-04-01
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux-gnu
Target: aarch64-linux-gnu
Once Jakub added a new test-case I see:
$ ./xgcc -B. /home
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94435
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94439
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard.sandiford at linaro
dot or
: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone
|WAITING
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-01
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: x86_64-linux-gnu
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94440
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
-gda920d0c46c38fe2
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94441
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94440
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
|1
Priority|P3 |P1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
Keywords||needs-reduction
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Blocks
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: linkw at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94443
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
$ cat sparsity_pattern.ii
int a;
unsigned *b;
class A {
A();
};
A::A() {
for (unsigned i; i <= a; ++i, ++b)
;
}
$ g++ -O3 -march=znver2 sparsity_pattern.ii
sparsity_pattern.ii: In constructor 'A::A()'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94443
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Or a simple C code:
$ cat tc.i
int a;
unsigned *b;
void foo()
{
for (unsigned i; i <= a; ++i, ++b)
;
}
$ gcc -O3 -march=znver2 tc.i
tc.i: In function 'foo':
tc.i:4:6: error: missing definition
4 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94448
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-01
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94443
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94451
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94249
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Khem Raj from comment #20)
> (In reply to CVS Commits from comment #18)
> > The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/g:142d68f50b48309f48e34fc1d9d6dbbeecf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94364
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 48169
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48169&action=edit
qsort patch
I'm sending spec_qsort patch we use. I'm going to prepare a patch that will
revert this and add -fno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94364
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
With something like:
diff --git a/benchspec/CPU/505.mcf_r/src/spec_qsort/spec_qsort.c
b/benchspec/CPU/505.mcf_r/src/spec_qsort/spec_qsort.c
index 05cad501..ad79ddae 100755
--- a/benchspec/CPU/505.mcf_r/src/sp
|--- |10.0
Assignee|clyon at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
It's ICF issue and I've got a patch for it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92264
--- Comment #41 from Martin Liška ---
The current master does:
$ time gfortran module_configure.fppized.f90 -c -march=znver2 -std=legacy
-fconvert=big-endian -fno-openmp -Ofast -march=znver2 -g
...
real2m21.190s
user2m20.487s
sys 0m0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92264
--- Comment #43 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #42)
> Is that good enough to mark this PR as resolved? In #c0 you said before
> Richard's change it took ~200s, which is more than 2m21s, though it is
> unclear if th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94445
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Known to fail|
||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-03
Priority|P3 |P1
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94462
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Note that before the revision we accepted the code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94460
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90275
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE: in|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE: in
|NEW
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org,
||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-03
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, it's very old issu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94445
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-03
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, started with r10-7515-g2c0fa3ecf70d199a.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94443
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
Can we close it as fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93597
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||avieira at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94468
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction |
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94468
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Minimal command line options:
$ g++ pr94468.cc -O2 -c -fPIC
||2020-04-03
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, started with r7-4526
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91322
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #8)
> Do we have compile farm machine where this can be reproduced?
I guess we don't have any.
||2020-04-03
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
I guess it's dup of PR94443. Can you please test current master (which should
be fixed)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94482
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
|1
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-04
||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|[10 Regression] ICE: tree |[9/10 Regression] ICE: tree
|check: expected |check: expected
|type_pack_expansion, have
,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-04
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, started with r10-4424-g81a34a6b68184436.
reconfirmed||2020-04-04
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, started with r10-3735-gcb57504a55015891.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94482
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94482
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
But I bet it's invalid code:
$ gcc -fsanitize=undefined pr94482.c -O2 && ./a.out
pr94482.c:14:11: runtime error: index 2 out of bounds for type 'long int [2]'
pr94482.c:14:15: runtime error: store to addres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94482
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.4.0
CC|
||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Started with r9-6542
|WAITING
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-06
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
A test-case will be needed please.
|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Can you please provide a pre-processed test-case (-E option)?
,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-06
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed.
||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-06
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, started with r10-4397
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94482
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #9)
> > Isn't the problem right now the violation of -Wpsabi?
>
> Why would that be a problem? That warning sais that if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94482
--- Comment #15 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> Reduced testcase (-O2 -msse2 -m32):
> typedef unsigned V __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16)));
> union U
> {
> V j;
> unsigned long long i __attribute__ ((
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks: 26163
Target Milestone: ---
I see various debug info size growth for different compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94495
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94307
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 48209
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48209&action=edit
Patch candidate for shift_out_of_bounds
Patch for GCC that supports -fsanitize-minimal-runtime for shift_out_of_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94495
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
One TU difference from SPEC2006 454.calculix:
$ gfortran -c -o restarts.o -ISPOOLES -Ofast -g -std=legacy restarts.f
...
$ ~/Programming/bloaty/bloaty restarts.o -- /tmp/before.o
VM SIZE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94495
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
There's a bigger object file:
$ /Programming/bloaty/bloaty nonlingeo.after.o
VM SIZE FILE SIZE
-- --
84.0% 32.7Ki .text
||2020-04-07
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, -fconcepts started with GCC 6. Is it a valid or invalid code?
,
||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-07
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
|ASSIGNED
Known to fail||10.0
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-07
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following release:
https://www.gnupg.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94516
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 48227
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48227&action=edit
Reducing patch for psk-file.c
I tried both ASAN and UBSAN, and also valgrind with -O0 and it seems all fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94516
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 48228
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48228&action=edit
pre-processed source file
It's compiled with:
$ gcc -fdiagnostics-show-option -O2 -Wall -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
-f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94516
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 48230 [details]
> gcc10-pr94516.patch
>
I can confirm the patch fixes the gnutls. Would you be able to come up with a
test-case?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94516
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> Created attachment 48231 [details]
> gcc10-pr94516.patch
>
> Sure, here it is with a testcase.
Great job!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93398
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94523
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.3.0
Last reconfirmed|
90-g76f09260b7eccd6c
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: marxi
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Reduced test-case:
$ cat ice.i
typedef struct
{
int __val[8 * sizeof 0];
} __sigset_t;
void
fn1 (__sigset_t *p1)
{
__sigset_t *a = p1;
}
void fn3 ();
void
fn2 ()
{
__sigset_t b;
fn1
301 - 400 of 15302 matches
Mail list logo
