https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102734
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102792
--- Comment #2 from Fedor Chelnokov ---
Here is a valid code, accepted by other compilers, leading to the same ICE:
```
using V = decltype([](auto x) { x.f(); });
class A{
void f() {}
public:
friend constexpr auto V::operator()(auto)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102703
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> Created attachment 51614 [details]
> Patch which I am testing
>
> The previous file had an extra (older) patch in it.
I should add some stats for this, oh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #44 from Christoph Reiter ---
Fore completeness: The "exceptions not working" problem now also crept into our
v10.3 build with the last rebuild. Maybe some dependency change in the last two
months, but no idea :/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102794
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102794
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102794
Bug ID: 102794
Summary: [12 Regression] missing vrp in evrp dealing with casts
and ands
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102663
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> I would install the patch for now.
OK, I'll need to regenerate it and re-test it first...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102703
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #51613|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102703
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 51613
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51613=edit
Current patchset which I am testing
Here is my current patch set which fixes this. It is 4 patches. The first
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102703
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
Only powerpc64-unknown-freebsd was checked for.
Signed-off-by: Piotr Kubaj
---
gcc/configure| 2 +-
gcc/configure.ac | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/configure b/gcc/configure
index 5ea5a1b7143..8790153cfda 100755
--- a/gcc/configure
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102703
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #9)
> Also, if we did have cleaner IL, we could probably tweak the threader to
> elide the call to foo() earlier. That is, without having to resort to help
> from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102750
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 8:06 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 6:42 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 6:03 AM Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 2:56 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 5:45 AM Richard Biener
> > > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #43 from Óscar Fuentes ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #42)
> Can you remove the crtbegin.o too, just to be sure, rebuild libstdc++ and
> upload the DLL at the same URL as before?
Same result after moving away
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 6:42 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 6:03 AM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 2:56 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 5:45 AM Richard Biener
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 5:50 PM H.J. Lu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #42 from Eric Botcazou ---
> After removing the spurious crtend.o and rebuilding libstdc++ following
> those instructions, the new libstdc++-6.dll still crashes the same way.
Can you remove the crtbegin.o too, just to be sure,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102755
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Duncan Simpson from comment #3)
> I *can* build the cross compiler because the override spec files get the
> assembler name right when I use --with-as=. There are
> no problems building the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102767
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in |[12 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #41 from Óscar Fuentes ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #40)
> > Do you want a full rebuild of gcc?
>
> At least a full rebuild of libstdc++-v3:
> rm -rf i686-w64-mingw32/libstdc++-v3
> make all-target-libstdc++-v3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102787
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 regression] ICE in new |ICE in new test case
THis fixes teh following error seen with Clang:
error: function '_S_convert>' with deduced
return type cannot be used before it is defined
return string_type(_S_convert(std::u8string_view(__str)));
^
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/bits/fs_path.h
A recently approved change for the C++23 working draft.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/bits/basic_string.h (__cpp_lib_string_resize_and_overwrite):
Define for C++23.
(basic_string::resize_and_overwrite): Declare.
* include/bits/basic_string.tcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102784
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99594
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-15
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99594
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ispavlick at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102777
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #40 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Do you want a full rebuild of gcc?
At least a full rebuild of libstdc++-v3:
rm -rf i686-w64-mingw32/libstdc++-v3
make all-target-libstdc++-v3 -jN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #39 from Eric Botcazou ---
> We do not have it. Can you (temporarily) remove it and see what happens?
In fact we specifically remove them at packaging time:
# Remove crtbegin.o and crtend.o. We are rebuilding them during
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #38 from Óscar Fuentes ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #37)
> > It comes from the MinGW-w64 CRT.
>
> We do not have it. Can you (temporarily) remove it and see what happens?
After moving away that file, exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #37 from Eric Botcazou ---
> It comes from the MinGW-w64 CRT.
We do not have it. Can you (temporarily) remove it and see what happens?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #36 from Óscar Fuentes ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #34)
> > These are the crtend.o from the installed gcc 10.3 (which works fine):
> >
> > $ for f in `find /mingw32 -name crtend.o` ; do echo $f && nm $f ; done
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #35 from Óscar Fuentes ---
Yes, it is a debug build (the libstdc++ dll you got is from that). The same
crash happens with a release build, though.
Note the -Og going after the -O2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #34 from Eric Botcazou ---
> These are the crtend.o from the installed gcc 10.3 (which works fine):
>
> $ for f in `find /mingw32 -name crtend.o` ; do echo $f && nm $f ; done
> /mingw32/i686-w64-mingw32/lib/crtend.o
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #33 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Weird, this looks like a compilation at -O0. Can you post the command line?
-O1 gives the same assembly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #32 from Eric Botcazou ---
> The compilation emits this warning:
>
> ../../../gcc-11.2.0/libgcc/config/i386/cygming-crtend.c:59:1: warning:
> constructor priorities from 0 to 100 are reserved for the implementation
>
Thank you for writing this out Bill!
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 08:50:08AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> Longer term, we have the question of supporting more Power targets. AIX will
> continue to
> use only double-double.
Yes. So it will be virtually no cost to continue supporting
double-double
Snapshot gcc-10-20211015 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20211015/
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
On Linux/x86_64,
93ac832f1846e4867aa6537f76f510fab8e3e87d is the first bad commit
commit 93ac832f1846e4867aa6537f76f510fab8e3e87d
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date: Thu Oct 7 10:12:29 2021 -0400
Ranger : Do not process abnormal ssa-names.
caused
FAIL: 27_io/ios_base/failure/dual_abi.cc
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 04:20:49PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> If we do implement double-double support, I think KIND=15 would be better
> than KIND=17, it is true that double-double has for certain numbers much
> higher precision than IEEE quad, but the precision depends on the numbers
> and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102785
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102770
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #31 from Óscar Fuentes ---
> Could you replay the compilation of this file? In the top level directory,
> do
> rm i686-w64-mingw32/libgcc/crtend.o
> make all-target-libgcc
> copy the (long) command line, go into the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #30 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I have quite a few crtend.o files in the build directory. A quick glance
> indicates that .text.startup is missing:
>
> $ for f in `find ./build-i686-w64-mingw32/ -name crtend.o` ; do echo $f &&
> nm $f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102792
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88003
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vladimir.kokovic at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97823
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97823
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102760
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #3)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> > Likely triggered with r7-821-gc7986356a1ca8e8e.
>
> From Andrew's comment, it looks like the bug is before that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102793
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> This is a gimple level missed optimization where the indirect function call
> is not "commonized". There are a few other bugs which are similar to this
> too.
This patch fixes two issues:
First, to print 'CLASS(t2)' instead of:
Error: Type mismatch in argument ‘x’ at (1); passed CLASS(__class_MAIN___T2_a)
to TYPE(t)
Additionally,
class(t2) = class(t) ! 't2' extends 't'
class(t2) = class(any)
was wrongly accepted.
OK?
Tobias
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102793
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-15
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102793
Bug ID: 102793
Summary: AArch64: sequential comparisons with equal conditional
blocks don't use ccmp
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102792
Bug ID: 102792
Summary: Internal compiler error if define lambda::operator()
as friend
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102044
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
commit r12-4453-g79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102039
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
commit r12-4453-g79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102034
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
commit r12-4453-g79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102033
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
commit r12-4453-g79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51851
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
commit r12-4453-g79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101402
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
commit r12-4453-g79802c5dcc043a515f429bb2bec7573b8537c32a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
On 10/14/21 07:04, Nick Huang wrote:
IMHO, I think your patch probably finally solved this long-standing Core
1001 issue. Of course it is not up to me to say so. I just want to point out
that it even solves the following case, even though it is more or less
expected if concept and lambda all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102791
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-15
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #29 from Óscar Fuentes ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #28)
> OK, I know what's wrong in the libstdc++.dll of GCC 11, now let's try to
> figure out why this is so... Can you run 'nm' on one of the occurrences of
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102791
Bug ID: 102791
Summary: Friend declaration of lambda function is ignored
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102772
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102787
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The wrong locus for comment#1 is fixed by:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/check.c b/gcc/fortran/check.c
index cfaf9d26bbc..bfb371b82c9 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/check.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/check.c
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102786
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
On 9/24/21 13:53, Richard Sandiford wrote:
This patch adds a lang hook for defining a struct/RECORD_TYPE
“as if” it had appeared directly in the source code. It follows
the similar existing hook for enums.
It's the caller's responsibility to create the fields
(as FIELD_DECLs) but the hook's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62086
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62661
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11064
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mykola.dolhyi at avid dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11064
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dgun at umpire dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15688
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11064
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andi at lisas dot de
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12075
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11064
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kcc at mcst dot ru
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11806
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|10.1.0 |
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102788
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Started with r12-1075-g28484d00c45b7bf094a22a4fddf9ffdc7482c7e1
I just think that exposed the latent bug in the vectorizer as far as I can
tell.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102788
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed.
...
mask__43.21_62 = vect_cst__60 != vect_cst__61;
_43 = var_12.0_1 != 0;
_3 = (long long unsigned int) _43;
vect_patt_34.22_63 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR(mask__43.21_62);
_26 = (unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102789
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102790
Bug ID: 102790
Summary: Inactive ifdef block is checked on content validity
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102789
Bug ID: 102789
Summary: [12 regression] libgomp.c++/simd-3.C fails after
r12- for 32 bits
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102788
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102788
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Summary|Wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102788
Bug ID: 102788
Summary: Wrong code with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102783
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102787
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Interesting. Cannot reproduce on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
However, changing the testcase as follows:
program p
integer, parameter :: a(1) = 2
! integer, parameter :: b(2) = reshape([3,4], -[a])
Hi Tobias, all,
> > In developing the patch I encountered a difficulty with testcase
> > dec_structure_6.f90, which uses a DEC extension, namelist "old-style
> > CLIST initializers in STRUCTURE". I could not figure out how to
> > determine the shape of the initializer; it seemed to be always
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102783
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-10-15
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102783
pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot
On Linux/x86_64,
4764049dd620affcd3e2658dc7f03a6616370a29 is the first bad commit
commit 4764049dd620affcd3e2658dc7f03a6616370a29
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Fri Oct 15 16:25:25 2021 +0200
openmp: Fix up handling of OMP_PLACES=threads(1)
caused
FAIL: libgomp.c/places-10.c execution test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102685
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1e819bd95ebeefc1dc469daa1855ce005cb77822
commit r12-4452-g1e819bd95ebeefc1dc469daa1855ce005cb77822
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102786
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This might be a dup.
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 2:00 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 10/14/21 21:16, sunil.k.pandey wrote:
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr54200.c -Og -DPREVENT_OPTIMIZATION line 20 z == 3
>
> Hello.
>
> I've just verified the assembly is identical before and after the revision.
> So it must be a false
On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 02:44:12AM +0800, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> The patch currently does not allow strictly-structured BLOCK for
> sections/parallel sections,
> since I was referencing the 5.1 spec while writing it, although that is
> trivially fixable.
> (was sensing a bit odd why those two
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102787
Bug ID: 102787
Summary: [12 regression] ICE in new test case
gfortran.dg/reshape_shape_2.f90
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On 15.10.21 20:11, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 08:05:38PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
with -mabi=ibmlongdouble, I see 31 and 291, while with -mabi=ieeelongdouble
33 and 4931. The 0.0_8 precision/range values are 15 and 307, so neither
precision of C long double if it is
1 - 100 of 298 matches
Mail list logo
