Respected Sir/ Mam ,
I am Zunzarrao Deore, a computer science undergrad. I have just entered my
second year at D.Y. Patil college of engineering, Pune. I am new to open
source contribution but I am well aware of programming languages like C++,
Python, html and CSS also I have moderate knowledge
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 7:52 PM Lulu Cheng wrote:
>
> 在 2022/10/12 上午4:57, Caroline Tice 写道:
>
> I think that if VTV_PAGE_SIZE is not set to the actual size being used by
> the system, it could result in some unexpected failures. I believe the
> right thing to do in this case, since the size
On 10/11/22 21:39, Kito Cheng via Gcc-patches wrote:
I would suggest we do not include those header files unless we really need that.
Agreed. Policy is to include what's needed. There's actually some
scripts that will identify extraneous header includes, but I don't
recall if we ever ran
OK. I am gonna commit this with the following patches.
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Kito Cheng
Date: 2022-10-12 11:39
To: juzhe.zhong
CC: gcc-patches
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Refine riscv-vector-builtins.o include files and
makefile.
I would suggest we do not include those header files
I would suggest we do not include those header files unless we really need that.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:32 PM wrote:
>
> From: Ju-Zhe Zhong
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/riscv/riscv-vector-builtins.cc: Change include files same as
> ARM SVE.
> * config/riscv/t-riscv:
> -Original Message-
> From: Cui, Lili
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2022 11:00 AM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Liu, Hongtao ; ubiz...@gmail.com; Lu, Hongjiu
>
> Subject: [PATCH] Remove AVX512_VP2INTERSECT from PTA_SAPPHIRERAPIDS
>
> Hi Hontao,
>
> This patch is to remove
Add a soft floating point condition to the register recovery part of the code.
libitm/ChangeLog:
* config/loongarch/sjlj.S: Add a soft floating point condition to the
register recovery part of the code.
---
libitm/config/loongarch/sjlj.S | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
Hi gcc-patches,
I had applied the patch below to binutils-gdb, but it recently got wiped
out by a gcc -> binutils-gdb configure.ac sync. Would it be possible to
apply it to the gcc repo so this doesn't happen again?
Thanks,
Simon
On 2022-03-15 17:26, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:
>
在 2022/10/12 02:37, xclae...@gmail.com 写道:
Build it with:
meson setup builddir --cross-file cross_file_mingw64.txt
ninja -C builddir/
And it fails with:
That's because you compiled it as C. I used g++ to compile these, and there was
no such error.
For C, this inline issue is going
Hi Hontao,
This patch is to remove AVX512_VP2INTERSECT from PTA_SAPPHIRERAPIDS.
The new intel ISE removes AVX512_VP2INTERSECT from SAPPHIRERAPIDS,
AVX512_VP2INTERSECT is only supportted in Tigerlake.
Hi Uros,
This patch is to remove AVX512_VP2INTERSECT from PTA_SAPPHIRERAPIDS.
The new intel
Pushed to r13-3241
在 2022/9/27 下午10:01, David Malcolm 写道:
On Tue, 2022-09-27 at 14:02 +0800, Lulu Cheng wrote:
SARIF support was added in r13-967 but libvtv wasn't updated.
Sorry about breaking this. The patch looks reasonable to me, FWIW,
assuming that it fixes the issue, of
在 2022/10/12 上午4:57, Caroline Tice 写道:
I think that if VTV_PAGE_SIZE is not set to the actual size being used
by the system, it could result in some unexpected failures. I
believe the right thing to do in this case, since the size may vary,
is to get the actual size being used by the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107226
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107227
Bug ID: 107227
Summary: Compiler bug in private allocatable array in OpenACC
compute statement
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107226
On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 9:55 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> This commit failed tests
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr101668.c scan-assembler vpmovsxdq
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr101668.c scan-assembler vpmovsxdq
> FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr101668.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107226
Bug ID: 107226
Summary: [13 regression] r13-3219-g25413fdb2ac249 caused a lot
of testcase failures
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
This commit failed tests
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr101668.c scan-assembler vpmovsxdq
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr101668.c scan-assembler vpmovsxdq
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr101668.c scan-assembler vpmovsxdq
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr92645.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "vec_unpack_" 4
FAIL:
On 10/11/22 18:03, Paul Iannetta wrote:
Thank you very much for the comments.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 03:20:13PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/9/22 12:12, Paul Iannetta wrote:
That's a nice feature! LLVM is using AS to mangle the
address-name qualified types but that would have required
From: Ju-Zhe Zhong
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv-c.cc: Add new line.
* config/riscv/riscv_vector.h (vwrite_csr): Add new line.
---
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.cc | 2 +-
gcc/config/riscv/riscv_vector.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107220
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||admin at levyhsu dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107225
--- Comment #1 from urs at akk dot org ---
Created attachment 53694
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53694=edit
reduced test case for FP with -fanalyzer (-Wanalyzer-mismatching-deallocation,
-Wanalyzer-file-leak)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107225
Bug ID: 107225
Summary: FP with -Wanalyzer-mismatching-deallocation
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2022 9:59 PM
> To: Liu, Hongtao
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [x86] Add define_insn_and_split to support general
> version of "kxnor".
>
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 04:03:16PM +0800, liuhongt
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 16:31:25 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
On 10/11/22 13:46, Christoph Müllner wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 9:31 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:06:27 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Hi Christoph, Kito,
>
> On 5/5/21 12:36, Christoph
On 10/11/22 13:46, Christoph Müllner wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 9:31 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:06:27 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Hi Christoph, Kito,
>
> On 5/5/21 12:36, Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> This series provides a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106061
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note -Og enables -funreachable-traps which is why the ones with -O1
-funreachable-traps are duplicates of this bug too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106061
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andres at anarazel dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107224
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107224
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The full ICE is:
: In function 'dataBeginPlaceToPage_maxOldItem':
:6:3: error: edge points to wrong declaration:
6 | ItemPointerSet(dataBeginPlaceToPage_maxOldItem);
|
On 10/11/22 18:17, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Hi Jason
On 11 Oct 2022, at 23:06, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/11/22 17:58, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Tested on x86_64-darwin19, OK for master?
thanks
Iain
-- >8 --
Now we have the TARGET_EXPR_ELIDING_P flag, it is important to ensure it
is set properly on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107224
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: verify_cgraph_node |[13 Regression] ICE:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 11:07:06PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2022, Paul Iannetta via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > I have a patch to bring this feature to the C front-end as well, and
> > would like to hear your opinion on it, especially since it may affect
> > the feature-set of the
On 10/11/22 13:31, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:06:27 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
Hi Christoph, Kito,
On 5/5/21 12:36, Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches wrote:
This series provides a cleanup of the current atomics implementation
of RISC-V:
* PR100265: Use proper
Hi,
the recent optimization implemented for complex modes in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595865.html
contains an oversight for big-endian platforms in the "interesting corner
case" mentioned in the message: it uses a lowpart SUBREG when the integer
modes have different
The SPARC/Linux port is very similar to the SPARC/Solaris port nowadays so it
makes sense to copy the setting of the support for atomic primitives.
This fixes the single regression in the gnat.dg testsuite:
FAIL: gnat.dg/prot7.adb (test for excess errors)
Tested on SPARC64/Linux, applied on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
--- Comment #18 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #16)
> Hi Roger,
>
> (In reply to Roger Sayle from comment #15)
> > Yes, a COMPARE rtx can be used to set various flags on x86, but many other
> > operations also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #14)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #12)
> > >
> > > To determine the semantics of this piece of RTL you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107224
Bug ID: 107224
Summary: ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed with -Og
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Hi Jason
> On 11 Oct 2022, at 23:06, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On 10/11/22 17:58, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> Tested on x86_64-darwin19, OK for master?
>> thanks
>> Iain
>> -- >8 --
>> Now we have the TARGET_EXPR_ELIDING_P flag, it is important to ensure it
>> is set properly on target exprs. The
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 5:03 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>
> This is implicitly mentioned in the docs, but there were some questions
> in a recent patch. This makes it more exlicit that -falign-functions is
> meant to be ignored under -Os.
>
> gcc/doc/ChangeLog
>
> * invoke.texi
On 10/11/22 17:58, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Tested on x86_64-darwin19, OK for master?
thanks
Iain
-- >8 --
Now we have the TARGET_EXPR_ELIDING_P flag, it is important to ensure it
is set properly on target exprs. The code here has a mixture of APIs used
to build inits. This patch changes that to
Thank you very much for the comments.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 03:20:13PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 10/9/22 12:12, Paul Iannetta wrote:
> > That's a nice feature! LLVM is using AS to mangle the
> > address-name qualified types but that would have required an update of
> > libiberty's
Tested on x86_64-darwin19, OK for master?
thanks
Iain
-- >8 --
Now we have the TARGET_EXPR_ELIDING_P flag, it is important to ensure it
is set properly on target exprs. The code here has a mixture of APIs used
to build inits. This patch changes that to use cp_build_init_expr() where
possible,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107223
Bug ID: 107223
Summary: GCC 12.2 fails compilation on Linux PowerPC In
function 'bessel_jn_r17':
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107215
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107215
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53955284c031a17e6e49e730ef8947fe557ff35e
commit r13-3238-g53955284c031a17e6e49e730ef8947fe557ff35e
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
This is implicitly mentioned in the docs, but there were some questions
in a recent patch. This makes it more exlicit that -falign-functions is
meant to be ignored under -Os.
gcc/doc/ChangeLog
* invoke.texi (-falign-functions): Mention -Os
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 3 ++-
1 file
On Sun, 09 Oct 2022 23:07:21 PDT (-0700), richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 3:50 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
I found this when reading the documentation for Kito's recent patch.
From the discussion it sounds like this is the desired behavior, so
let's document it.
Maybe
gcc/doc/ChangeLog
* invoke.texi (-falign-functions): Mention cold/size-optimized
functions.
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index a24798d5029..6af18ae9bfd 100644
---
There were some recent discussions about the desired behavior of
-falign-functions, which is behaving as desired. This improves the
documentation to make that explicit.
Change since v1 <20221007134901.5078-1-pal...@rivosinc.com>:
* New patch 2 and 3
I found this when reading the documentation for Kito's recent patch.
>From the discussion it sounds like this is the desired behavior, so
let's document it.
gcc/doc/ChangeLog
* invoke.texi (-falign-functions): Mention __align__
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3
I think that if VTV_PAGE_SIZE is not set to the actual size being used by
the system, it could result in some unexpected failures. I believe the
right thing to do in this case, since the size may vary, is to get the
actual size being used by the system and use that in the definition of
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 9:31 PM Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:06:27 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > Hi Christoph, Kito,
> >
> > On 5/5/21 12:36, Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >> This series provides a cleanup of the current atomics implementation
> >> of
On 10/11/22 16:00, Marek Polacek wrote:
Since r12-8066, in cxx_eval_vec_init we perform expand_vec_init_expr
while processing the default argument in this test.
Hmm, why are we calling cxx_eval_vec_init during parsing of the default
argument? In particular, any expansion that depends on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
--- Comment #16 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Hi Roger,
(In reply to Roger Sayle from comment #15)
> Yes, a COMPARE rtx can be used to set various flags on x86, but many other
> operations also legitimately set and/or use MODE_CC, often in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107217
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
Dear all,
we need to check that the operands of arithmetic binary operations
are consistent and of numeric type.
The PR reported an issue for multiplication ("*"), but we better
extend this to the other binary operations.
I chose the following solution:
- consistent types for +,-,*,/, keeping
Le 11/10/2022 à 20:47, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit :
Dear all,
this PR is an obvious followup to PR107000, where invalid
types appeared in array constructors and lead to an ICE
either in a conversion or reduction of a unary or binary
expression.
The present PR shows that several other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 09:40:45AM +0200, Andreas Schwab via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Okt 10 2022, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pointer-to-fn1.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/pointer-to-fn1.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index
Since r12-8066, in cxx_eval_vec_init we perform expand_vec_init_expr
while processing the default argument in this test. At this point
start_preparsed_function hasn't yet set current_function_decl.
expand_vec_init_expr then leads to maybe_splice_retval_cleanup which
checks DECL_CONSTRUCTOR_P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107197
--- Comment #9 from Eugene Rozenfeld ---
107193 was fixed by
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:80f414e6d73f9f1683f93d83ce63a6a482e54bee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107222
Bug ID: 107222
Summary: const qualifier appears in mangled NTTP value when the
original object is so qualified
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
---
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 at 19:58, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2022, 19:38 David Edelsohn via Libstdc++,
> wrote:
>>
>> This patch seems to have broken bootstrap on AIX. It seems to assume
>> methods that aren't guaranteed to be defined.
>
>
>
> It doesn't use anything that wasn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107217
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 at 03:51, Patrick Palka via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for trunk? (The paper
> also makes changes to views::take and views::drop, which will be
> implemented separately.)
OK, thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107221
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:23c3cbaed36f6d2f3a7a64f6ebda69329723514b
commit r13-3237-g23c3cbaed36f6d2f3a7a64f6ebda69329723514b
Author: Jonathan Wakely
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:06:27 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote:
Hi Christoph, Kito,
On 5/5/21 12:36, Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches wrote:
This series provides a cleanup of the current atomics implementation
of RISC-V:
* PR100265: Use proper fences for atomic load/store
* PR100266: Provide
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107221
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Assignee|unassigned
Hi Christoph, Kito,
On 5/5/21 12:36, Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches wrote:
This series provides a cleanup of the current atomics implementation
of RISC-V:
* PR100265: Use proper fences for atomic load/store
* PR100266: Provide programmatic implementation of CAS
As both are very related, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107221
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100134
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9736a42e1fb8df30d72cf28594d9046bf50200c1
commit r13-3236-g9736a42e1fb8df30d72cf28594d9046bf50200c1
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99377
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2ceb4d531a303f3e70d8bb218c8759e6c0688f62
commit r13-3235-g2ceb4d531a303f3e70d8bb218c8759e6c0688f62
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022, 19:38 David Edelsohn via Libstdc++, <
libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> This patch seems to have broken bootstrap on AIX. It seems to assume
> methods that aren't guaranteed to be defined.
>
It doesn't use anything that wasn't already used by that file.
I have no idea how
Hi Guillermo,
On 10/3/22 7:39 AM, Guillermo E. Martinez via Gcc-patches wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/ctfc.cc b/gcc/ctfc.cc
index 9773358a475..253c36b6a0a 100644
--- a/gcc/ctfc.cc
+++ b/gcc/ctfc.cc
@@ -604,6 +604,7 @@ ctf_add_enum (ctf_container_ref ctfc, uint32_t
flag, const char * name,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107221
Bug ID: 107221
Summary: [13 Regression] libstdc++ EH no matching function
__gnu_cxx::__scoped_lock::__scoped_lock
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107219
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104433
--- Comment #3 from Luiz Henrique Laurini ---
Thank you for the fix. The test case seems to be working as expected now.
However, the original code
import ;
int main()
{
std::make_shared();
}
now causes an internal compiler error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107215
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3
Dear all,
this PR is an obvious followup to PR107000, where invalid
types appeared in array constructors and lead to an ICE
either in a conversion or reduction of a unary or binary
expression.
The present PR shows that several other conversions need to
be protected by a check of the type of the
Le mercredi 12 octobre 2022 à 01:42 +0800, LIU Hao a écrit :
> 在 2022-10-11 22:26, xclae...@gmail.com 写道:
> > #ifdef GLIB_COMPILATION
> > # define _GLIB_API _GLIB_EXPORT
> > # define GLIB_INLINE __attribute__((__dllexport__))
> > __attribute__((__gnu_inline__)) extern inline
>
> This is not
This patch seems to have broken bootstrap on AIX. It seems to assume
methods that aren't guaranteed to be defined.
Thanks, David
libtool: compile: /tmp/GCC/./gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/GCC/./gcc/
-B/nasfarm/edelsohn/ins
tall/GCC/powerpc-ibm-aix7.2.5.0/bin/
-B/nasfarm/edelsohn/install/GCC/powerpc-ibm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107220
Bug ID: 107220
Summary: [13 regression] gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-19.c fails
after r13-3212-gb88adba751da63
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106925
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Priority|P3
Hi -
> [...] Where was a statement from key members of the GNU Toolchain
> projects -- the people who actually use the services and
> infrastructure on a day to day basis for their participation in the
> GNU Toolchain projects -- asking for an alternative proposal? When
> were they allowed to
On 10/10/22 04:54, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
Hi!
My earlier patches gimplify the simplest non-side-effects assumptions
into if (cond) ; else __builtin_unreachable (); and throw the rest
on the floor.
The following patch attempts to do something with the rest too.
For -O0, it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
--- Comment #14 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #13)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #12)
> >
> > To determine the semantics of this piece of RTL you need to see the
> > setter(s)
> > of reg 17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107215
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 53692
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53692=edit
Patch
Check type of source expr before conversion.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106925
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
在 2022-10-11 22:26, xclae...@gmail.com 写道:
#ifdef GLIB_COMPILATION
# define _GLIB_API _GLIB_EXPORT
# define GLIB_INLINE __attribute__((__dllexport__))
__attribute__((__gnu_inline__)) extern inline
This is not correct. Typically, `dllexport` indicates that 'I want an external definition' but
On 10/11/22 11:35, Patrick Palka wrote:
IIUC the function depset::hash::add_binding_entity has an assert
verifying that if a namespace contains an exported entity, then
the namespace must have been opened in the module purview:
if (data->hash->add_namespace_entities (decl, data->partitions))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107215
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
Hi
Now that pretty printer is fixed (once patch validated) I'd like to
propose this patch again.
Note that I'am adding a check on pretty printer with a std::any on
a std::wstring. I did so because of the FIXME in printers.py which is
dealing with 'std::string' explicitely. Looks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107201
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 53691
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53691=edit
pr107201.diff: Proposed patch.
This proposed patch (effectively) sets macro X_NODEVLIB to "" in all of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107172
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #12)
>
> To determine the semantics of this piece of RTL you need to see the setter(s)
> of reg 17 feeding this use. In this case, the setter was
> (set (reg:CCC
On 10/11/22 10:58, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 10/4/22 13:36, Patrick Palka wrote:
Here when lazily loading the binding for f at parse time from the
template g, processing_template_decl is set and thus the call to
note_vague_linkage_fn from
On Tuesday 11 October 2022 15:33:59 Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Pali, Hi Richard,
>
> > Having file name and line number would be also useful as it took me
> > some time to figure out where is the issue...
>
> Right - I have tried a little harder and come up with a follow up patch.
> This is now
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107219
Bug ID: 107219
Summary: ICE in reduce_unary, at fortran/arith.cc:1290
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
1 - 100 of 256 matches
Mail list logo
