https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97834
Bug ID: 97834
Summary: gcov-instrumented binaries are very slow due to
unbuffered IO
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97833
Bug ID: 97833
Summary: -Wconversion behaves erratic
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88115
--- Comment #6 from James Y Knight ---
> c++: Change the mangling of __alignof__ [PR88115]
The new mangling chosen for __alignof__(type) seems problematic, and I think
this commit ought to be reverted until a new mangling scheme has been
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97712
--- Comment #4 from Paco Arjonilla ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> [[nodiscard]] is a function attribute rather than function type attribute,
> so it really doesn't apply to virtual calls (unless it can be devirtualized
>
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 8:58 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 11/14/20 6:35 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >> Jeffrey Law wrote:
> >> I worry a bit about the less common native targets -- aix, hpux and the
> >> like. But testing them is too painful to contemplate these days. I'm
> >> sure those
On 11/14/20 1:05 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> Any news on the latest snapshot? Can we remove the duplicate range
> built-in code?
11-08 looks real good, best we've had since mid-sept.
jeff
On 11/14/20 6:35 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> Jeffrey Law wrote:
>> I worry a bit about the less common native targets -- aix, hpux and the
>> like. But testing them is too painful to contemplate these days. I'm
>> sure those with access to suitable hardware will chime in if something
>>
> Jeffrey Law wrote:
> I worry a bit about the less common native targets -- aix, hpux and the
> like. But testing them is too painful to contemplate these days. I'm
> sure those with access to suitable hardware will chime in if something
> is amiss.
All of these testcases now fail on AIX
GCC considers PTRDIFF_MAX - 1 to be the size of the largest object
so that the difference between a pointer to the byte just past its
end and the first one is no more than PTRDIFF_MAX. This is too
liberal in LP64 on most systems because the size of the address
space is constrained to much less
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96299
henrik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at mysko dot org
--- Comment #2
Snapshot gcc-10-20201114 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20201114/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97595
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Here's a small test case that causes a bogus false positive with patched GCC
(https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-November/558775.html).
$ cat t.C && gcc -O2 -S -Wall t.C
struct A { char a[32];
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48958
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
Dear all,
here is a first version to check the status of ALLOCATABLE and POINTER
arguments to the SIZE intrinsic at runtime.
What it does not yet cover is situations like
complex, allocatable :: z(:)
print *, size (z% re)
Feedback, such as comments for improvement, are welcome.
As is, the
Hi,
The test needs to use Object rather than NSObject on this and earlier
OS versions. Although the PR reports against the GNU runtime, we run
this on NeXT as well.
tested on x86_64-darwin11 and x86_64-darwin16
pushed to master,
thanks
Iain
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97831
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
And see https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00130.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97831
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this was rejected 3 years ago:
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg02221.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97831
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I can think of a simple way disabling tail calls:
static void disabletailcallfunc(void*) __attribute__((noipa));
static void disabletailcallfunc(void *x){}
#define disabletailcall() do {int a;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97832
Bug ID: 97832
Summary: AoSoA complex caxpy-like loops: AVX2+FMA -Ofast 7
times slower than -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 5:27 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 1/14/20 5:05 PM, Lewis Hyatt wrote:
> > Hello-
> >
> > I thought I might ping this short patch please, just in case it may
> > make sense to include in GCC 10 along with the other UTF-8-related
> > fixes to diagnostics. Thanks!
> >
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97831
Bug ID: 97831
Summary: Lack of disable_tail_calls attribute
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
--- Comment #12 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Simulator: avrtest core simulator hosted on SourceForge as part of WinAVR.
Libc: avr-libc trunk hosted on nongnu.org. There are several patches not yet
integrated: recent xtiny devices, fixes in libm to
Any news on the latest snapshot? Can we remove the duplicate range built-in
code?
Aldy
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020, 22:43 Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 11/5/20 2:40 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > I'll wait for the 11/01 snapshot to finish then.
>
> I'm worried that the 11/01 snapshot is going to generate so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97830
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97830
Bug ID: 97830
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in expressions_equal_p at
gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c:5631 since
r11-4982-g4d6b8d4213376e8a
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
GCC has had the ability to emit fix-it hints in machine-readable form
since GCC 7 via -fdiagnostics-parseable-fixits and
-fdiagnostics-generate-patch.
The former emits additional specially-formatted lines to stderr; the
option and its format were directly taken from a pre-existing option
in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97821
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97082
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
At r11-5030 I get:
=
package-unused version-unused: ./test-suite.log
=
# TOTAL: 21
# PASS:
On Linux/x86_64,
520d5ad337eaa15860a5a964daf7ca46cf31c029 is the first bad commit
commit 520d5ad337eaa15860a5a964daf7ca46cf31c029
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Sat Nov 14 13:52:36 2020 +0100
Detect EAF flags in ipa-modref
caused
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr59776.c -O1 -DPREVENT_OPTIMIZATION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97829
Bug ID: 97829
Summary: pragma ignore "-Wint-in-bool-context" is ignored for
_Bool _Complex interaction
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On Friday 13 November 2020 at 21:58:25 +, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
> On Thursday 12 November 2020 at 23:07:47 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On 29/05/20 07:17 +0100, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > The futex system call supports waiting for an absolute time if
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97828
Bug ID: 97828
Summary: std::ranges::search_n does not work with
counted_iterator<_List_iterator<...>>
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
ping
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of Tamar
> Christina
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 3:31 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Richard Earnshaw ; nd ;
> Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: [PATCH v2 12/16]AArch64: Add SVE2 Integer RTL patterns for
> Complex
ping
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of Tamar
> Christina
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 3:30 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Richard Earnshaw ; nd ;
> Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: [PATCH v2 11/16]AArch64: Add SVE RTL patterns for Complex
> Addition,
ping
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of Tamar
> Christina
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 3:32 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Richard Earnshaw ; nd ;
> Ramana Radhakrishnan
> Subject: [PATCH v2 15/16]Arm: Add MVE RTL patterns for Complex Addition,
>
ping
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of Tamar
> Christina
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 3:30 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Richard Earnshaw ; nd ;
> Marcus Shawcroft
> Subject: [PATCH v2 10/16]AArch64: Add NEON RTL patterns for Complex
> Addition,
ping
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc-patches On Behalf Of Tamar
> Christina
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 3:31 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Richard Earnshaw ; nd ;
> Ramana Radhakrishnan
> Subject: [PATCH v2 14/16]Arm: Add NEON RTL patterns for Complex Addition,
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97589
Toon Moene changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
Hi All,
This patch adds the pre-requisites and general scaffolding for supporting doing
SLP pattern matching.
Bootstrapped Regtested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and no issues.
Ok for master?
Thanks,
Tamar
gcc/ChangeLog:
* tree-vect-loop.c (vect_dissolve_slp_only_patterns): New.
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020, 13:30 Mike Crowe via Libstdc++,
wrote:
> On Saturday 14 November 2020 at 00:17:59 +, Jonathan Wakely via
> Libstdc++ wrote:
> > On 32-bit targets where userspace has switched to 64-bit time_t, we
> > cannot pass struct timespec to SYS_futex or SYS_clock_gettime, because
On Saturday 14 November 2020 at 00:17:59 +, Jonathan Wakely via Libstdc++
wrote:
> On 32-bit targets where userspace has switched to 64-bit time_t, we
> cannot pass struct timespec to SYS_futex or SYS_clock_gettime, because
> the userspace definition of struct timespec will not match what the
On Saturday 14 November 2020 at 00:17:22 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 13/11/20 22:45 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On 13/11/20 21:12 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > On 13/11/20 20:29 +, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > > On Friday 13 November 2020 at 17:25:22 +, Jonathan
Hey,
On 13.11.20 05:45, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/29/19 12:15 PM, Tim Rühsen wrote:
* cplus-dem.c (ada_demangle): Correctly calculate the demangled
size by using two passes.
So I'm not sure why, but I can't get this patch to apply. What's even
more interesting is ada_demangle doesn't seem
Hello David,
I also would like to use GCC to get code coverage on an embedded system.
My approach would be to place the gcov information in a dedicated linker
set:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-November/559004.html
Please have a look at the attached patches for a proposal
This is the third revision of my patch:
1. Two typos in the commit message have been fixed.
2. Support for `%a` and `%A` has been added. Documentation can be
found on the same page in the commit message.
3. GCC will no longer warn about 'ISO C does not support the ‘L’
ms_printf length
acsaw...@linux.ibm.com writes:
> From: Aaron Sawdey
>
> After discussion with Richard Sandiford on IRC, he suggested adding a
> new mode class MODE_OPAQUE to deal with the problems (PR 96791) we had
> been having with POImode/PXImode in powerpc target. This patch is the
> accumulation of changes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70928
Jens Seifert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jens.seifert at de dot ibm.com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97827
Bug ID: 97827
Summary: [11 Regression] bootstrap error building the
amdgcn-amdhsa offload compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
Hi, thanks for reviewing this patch. This patch just change a typo in
comment of gcc/lto/lto-symtab.c. The original comment is "because after
removing one of duplicate decls the hash is not correcly updated to the
ohter dupliate.", I change "ohter" to "other". So I don't do any tesst and
provide
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97826
Bug ID: 97826
Summary: internal compiler error: in cp_build_addr_expr_1, at
cp/typeck.c:6453
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97825
Bug ID: 97825
Summary: internal compiler error: in build_ptrmemfunc, at
cp/typeck.c:9199
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97824
Bug ID: 97824
Summary: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at
gimplify.c:14531
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97823
Bug ID: 97823
Summary: internal compiler error: in poplevel_class, at
cp/name-lookup.c:4112
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97822
Bug ID: 97822
Summary: internal compiler error: in choose_baseaddr
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97599
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2873c8af66e1248734bb638a49e6bc53f5e45382
commit r11-5028-g2873c8af66e1248734bb638a49e6bc53f5e45382
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
55 matches
Mail list logo
