Hi André,
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 6:03 PM Andre Vieira (lists) via Gcc-patches <
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> This patch relaxes the addressing modes for the mve full load and stores
> (by full loads and stores I mean non-widening or narrowing loads and
> stores resp).
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 7:21 PM Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * tree-ssa-sink.c (select_best_block): Punt if selected block
> has incoming abnormal edges.
OK.
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * gcc.dg/setjmp-7.c: New test.
> ---
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104048
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Arjen Markus from comment #2)
> That reduced example is wonderfully compact! (I checked for similar reports
> but probably missed bug report 79440, because it was not associated with
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104048
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104048
--- Comment #2 from Arjen Markus ---
That reduced example is wonderfully compact! (I checked for similar reports but
probably missed bug report 79440, because it was not associated with
"recursive" data types)
On 13.01.22 22:58, Thomas Koenig via Fortran wrote:
with this patch, it is now possible to specify both the
endianness and the REAL(KIND=16) format using the
environment variable GFORTRAN_CONVERT_UNIT.
I have now pushed this to trunk.
Best regards
Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100952
--- Comment #16 from HaoChen Gui ---
prefix-no-update.c should be fixed by the patch Segher proposed in PR103197.
pr56605.c got a wrong fixed and failed with GCC11. I will submit a patch to fix
it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103197
HaoChen Gui changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guihaoc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
on 2022/1/14 下午9:53, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 5:42 AM Kewen.Lin wrote:
>>
>> on 2022/1/13 下午11:15, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 7:40 AM Kewen.Lin wrote:
Hi David,
on 2022/1/13 上午11:12, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103124
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by HaoChen Gui :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:240dd6c063b481c092c9ec406b69b400f6f033f1
commit r12-6620-g240dd6c063b481c092c9ec406b69b400f6f033f1
Author: Haochen Gui
Date: Mon
On Linux/x86_64,
86e3b476d5defaa79c94d40b76cbeec21cd02e5f is the first bad commit
commit 86e3b476d5defaa79c94d40b76cbeec21cd02e5f
Author: Francois-Xavier Coudert
Date: Mon Jan 17 00:00:18 2022 +0100
Fortran: xfail signaling NaN testcases on x87
caused
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104059
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104060
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104060
Bug ID: 104060
Summary: -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm on address of local
array
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104059
Bug ID: 104059
Summary: cprop_hardreg propgates hard registers for mov
instructions between different REG_CLASS without
considering cost
Product: gcc
Version:
On 1/8/22 9:24 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
This patch fixes the ICE I reported in PR103163. We were initializing
stack_limit_rtx before the register properties it depends on were
getting set. I moved it to the same function where stack_pointer_rtx,
frame_pointer_rtx, etc are being
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104048
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||7.1.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104047
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104039
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.1.0
Severity|enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104049
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104058
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103997#c4 might be the discussion
around what is happening.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104058
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104058
Bug ID: 104058
Summary: [12 Regression] 6-7% x264_r regression with
-march=native -Ofast -funroll-loops -flto on x86 since
r12-6420-gd3ff7420e941931d32ce2e332e7968fe67ba20af
On Linux/x86_64,
90045c5df5b3c8853e7740fb72a11aead1c489bb is the first bad commit
commit 90045c5df5b3c8853e7740fb72a11aead1c489bb
Author: Francois-Xavier Coudert
Date: Mon Jan 10 17:04:34 2022 +0100
Fortran: allow IEEE_VALUE to correctly return signaling NaNs
caused
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #21 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #18)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #17)
> > also multilib directories under ${prefix} for a cross does not use OS
> > directories as most cross compilers have OS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #20 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #18)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #17)
> > also multilib directories under ${prefix} for a cross does not use OS
> > directories as most cross compilers have OS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #19 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #18)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #17)
> > also multilib directories under ${prefix} for a cross does not use OS
> > directories as most cross compilers have OS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #18 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #17)
> also multilib directories under ${prefix} for a cross does not use OS
> directories as most cross compilers have OS directories.
Of course. I installed Linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pinski ---
also multilib directories under ${prefix} for a cross does not use OS
directories as most cross compilers have OS directories.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
There are a definitely a few steps missing,
Where is the Linux headers installed?
How did you configure glibc and install it?
I don't see you copying the headers of glibc anywhere.
sysroots make it easier
orted LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.0 20220116 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #14 from cqwrteur ---
export PATH=$PREFIX/bin:$PATH
sorry
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #12)
> I don't care about your youtube videos (they are not accessable due to not
> having
> the steps written down). I need the steps written here in the bug report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't care about your youtube videos (they are not accessable due to not
having
the steps written down). I need the steps written here in the bug report.
On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 23:01 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 1/13/22 17:30, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-01-13 at 17:08 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > When a sequence of diagnostic messages bounces back and forth
> > > repeatedly
> > > between two includes, as with
> > >
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #11 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> Please provide the full steps how you build the cross compilers?
> Please provide the exact command where the problem shows up after building
> the compiler?
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Please provide the full steps how you build the cross compilers?
Please provide the exact command where the problem shows up after building the
compiler?
Without that we cannot fix anything.
If you don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is --with-build-sysroot option explicitly for that case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #8 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #5)
> > There is a lot of reasons why sysroot should not be set. Like Canadian
> > compilation.
>
> Huh? I do Canadian crosses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #7 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to cqwrteur from comment #5)
> > There is a lot of reasons why sysroot should not be set. Like Canadian
> > compilation.
>
> Huh? I do Canadian crosses
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #5)
> There is a lot of reasons why sysroot should not be set. Like Canadian
> compilation.
Huh? I do Canadian crosses with sysroot too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> There is also multi-arch too.
> I build cross compilers all the time and they find libraries under the
> sysroot :
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is also multi-arch too.
I build cross compilers all the time and they find libraries under the sysroot
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104055
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #3 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Can you give an example?
> There are two different directories where multilib is there.
> One is based on the multilib name and the other is the OS multi-lib
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
--- Comment #2 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Can you give an example?
> There are two different directories where multilib is there.
> One is based on the multilib name and the other is the OS multi-lib
>
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* doc/xml/manual/status_cxx2020.xml: Update.
* doc/html/manual/status.html: Regenerate.
Pushed to trunk.
commit a326934886f606b4a4a60254917f58c825d7c94b
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Thu Jan 13 22:18:13 2022
libstdc++: Update C++20 status
On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 22:40, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 18 Sept 2021 at 05:12, Thomas Rodgers
> wrote:
>
>> From: Thomas Rodgers
>>
>> Let's try this one instead.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Rodgers
>>
>
> If you're doing DCO "Signed-off-by" commits you don't need FSF copyright
>
On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 22:15 +0530, Mir Immad wrote:
> HI David,
> I've been tinkering with the static analyzer for the last few days. I
> find
> the project of adding SARIF output to the analyzer intresting. I'm
> writing
> this to let you know that I'm trying to learn the codebase.
> Thank you.
On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 21:30, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 at 08:57, Matthias Kretz wrote:
>
>> ping. OK to push?
>>
>
> Sorry for the delay - this is OK for trunk.
>
I see a new failure on powerpc64le-linux (gcc112 in the cfarm) after this
commit:
FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77780
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
On Sun, 2022-01-16 at 18:52 +0530, Shubham Narlawar via Gcc wrote:
> Hello,
Hi; various notes inline below...
>
> My aim is to iterate over gimple call stmt parameters and check
> whether it is constant or constant expression and mark/store them for
> some gimple transformation.
>
> I have an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-16
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99476
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
../../../../../../../gcc/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cpp: In function 'void
__asan::AsanCheckIncompatibleRT()':
../../../../../../../gcc/libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cpp:200:21: error:
'PATH_MAX' was not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104057
Bug ID: 104057
Summary: cross compiler multilibs libs path too chaos
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104052
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-01-16
Ever confirmed|0
This patch is the third in my “signaling NaN” series. For targets with IEEE
support but without the issignaling macro in libc (i.e., everywhere except
glibc), this allows us to provide a fallback implementation. In order to keep
the code in ieee_helper.c relatively readable, I’ve put that new
Hi Mikael, team,
> Thanks. Pushed:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=90045c5df5b3c8853e7740fb72a11aead1c489bb
Pushed a further commit to XFAIL the testcases on x87:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=86e3b476d5defaa79c94d40b76cbeec21cd02e5f
There the ABI does not allow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104052
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
There are other types it messes up with too. E.g. the opaque types (PR 98688).
I noticed vector types are not handled correctly either. It assumes all vector
types of the same size are the same which is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104052
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c: aarch64_fp16_type_node = make_node
(REAL_TYPE);
config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c: aarch64_bf16_type_node = make_node
(REAL_TYPE);
config/arm/arm-builtins.c:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104031
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> That last testcase isn't very good for the testsuite, because 0 is pretty
> common value on the stack, so even without the store the chances that it
> will be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104052
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I bet we don't reach this because modules.cc has:
/* Global trees. */
static const std::pair global_tree_arys[] =
{
std::pair (sizetype_tab, stk_type_kind_last),
std::pair (integer_types,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104052
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
Snapshot gcc-12-20220116 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20220116/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hi Mikael,
Backporting the fix for pr103789 on the 11 branch revealed a lack of test
coverage for the tests provided with that fix. Indeed, the tests use the KIND
argument of the respective intrinsics only with keyword arguments.
This adds variants with non-keyword arguments.
The tests
Thanks Mikael,
> This looks good to me. Thanks.
Thanks. Pushed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=90045c5df5b3c8853e7740fb72a11aead1c489bb
FX
-
This e-mail is subjected to the disclaimer that can be viewed at:
* http://www.cut.ac.za/www/disclaimer/email_disclaimer
-
Backporting the fix for pr103789 on the 11 branch revealed a lack of test
coverage for the tests provided with that fix. Indeed, the tests use the KIND
argument of the respective intrinsics only with keyword arguments.
This adds variants with non-keyword arguments.
The tests enriched this way
After PR97896 for which some code was added to ignore the KIND argument
of the INDEX intrinsics, and PR87711 for which that was extended to LEN_TRIM
as well, this propagates it further to MASKL, MASKR, SCAN and VERIFY.
PR fortran/103789
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
* trans-array.c
The mainline code to check whether an argument has to be included in
scalarization uses only the name of a dummy argument object to recognize a
specific argument of an intrinsic procedure. On the 11 branch, the dummy
argument object is not available and the code uses a mix of check for
argument
Hello,
I noticed a bug while backporting the fix for PR103789 on the 11 branch.
It makes the cherry-pick not exactly straightforward.
The bug is fixed in the first patch, the backport comes in the second, and
additional test coverage (pushed earlier today on master) is added in
the third.
Tested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104056
--- Comment #2 from cqwrteur ---
skipping link test. i got features.h no such file
/home/cqwrteur/myhome/gcc_build/native/x86_64-ubuntu-linux-gnu/gcc/x86_64-ubuntu-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/x86_64-ubuntu-linux-gnu/bits/os_defines.h:39:10:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97896
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Mikael Morin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:024fd4fb5a1ba742242eec84149f159518444ae3
commit r11-9469-g024fd4fb5a1ba742242eec84149f159518444ae3
Author: Mikael Morin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103789
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Mikael Morin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:024fd4fb5a1ba742242eec84149f159518444ae3
commit r11-9469-g024fd4fb5a1ba742242eec84149f159518444ae3
Author: Mikael Morin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87711
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Mikael Morin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:024fd4fb5a1ba742242eec84149f159518444ae3
commit r11-9469-g024fd4fb5a1ba742242eec84149f159518444ae3
Author: Mikael Morin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103789
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Mikael Morin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8d394947776ad2b3ab8376dbf3c198f357bcd322
commit r11-9468-g8d394947776ad2b3ab8376dbf3c198f357bcd322
Author: Mikael Morin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97896
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Mikael Morin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e63ef9ae51ab67fdd280401e643eb97fddef8d93
commit r11-9467-ge63ef9ae51ab67fdd280401e643eb97fddef8d93
Author: Mikael Morin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87711
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Mikael Morin
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e63ef9ae51ab67fdd280401e643eb97fddef8d93
commit r11-9467-ge63ef9ae51ab67fdd280401e643eb97fddef8d93
Author: Mikael Morin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104056
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
../../../../gcc/configure --disable-nls --disable-werror --disable-shared
--disable-threads --without-headers --disable-hosted-libstdcxx
--disable-libstdcxx-verbose --enable-initfini-array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104056
Bug ID: 104056
Summary: --disable-hosted-libstdcxx does not work for
x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Final ping before stage3 ends:
[PATCH] Add --enable-first-stage-cross configure option
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575318.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104055
Bug ID: 104055
Summary: Temporary with conteval constructor is ignored
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67804
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
*** Bug 77667 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77667
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103782
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eff452df296a6f3d0f94408bb2a4a5c4a3c86eb7
commit r11-9466-geff452df296a6f3d0f94408bb2a4a5c4a3c86eb7
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67804
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c5bf6dc27cdb091f1f8046f98ce7ca197bffd908
commit r11-9465-gc5bf6dc27cdb091f1f8046f98ce7ca197bffd908
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104031
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 52208
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52208=edit
gcc12-pr104031.patch
This seems to work for the testcase, but dunno if there aren't better fixes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104037
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 11:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 at 09:34, Jonathan Wakely via Libstdc++ <
> libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> This passes testing (with -std=gnu++98/11/17/20) but is quite a large
>> patch for this late in stage 3. Does anybody object to doing this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104031
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That last testcase isn't very good for the testsuite, because 0 is pretty
common value on the stack, so even without the store the chances that it will
be already zero are high.
42 is less likely...
// PR
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 at 01:48, Thomas Rodgers via Libstdc++ <
libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> This patch updates the memory order of atomic accesses to the waiter's
> count to match libc++'s usage. It should be backported to GCC11.
>
The commit subject line says "memory memory order", OK for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104037
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bca1c431affee41ecadb7f29d8d65142a73e0ebf
commit r12-6614-gbca1c431affee41ecadb7f29d8d65142a73e0ebf
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103324
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/install/test.html says "To get a list of the possible *.exp
files, pipe the output of ‘make check’ into a file and look at the ‘Running …
.exp’ lines." ...has anyone stored their output
Hello,
I have just pushed the attached patch after testing the impacted tests
individually.
MikaelFrom 15630e6e9eb019477d1fc5c0966b43979e18ae18 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mikael Morin
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 18:33:36 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] testsuite: Enrich tests with variants failing on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97896
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mikael Morin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15630e6e9eb019477d1fc5c0966b43979e18ae18
commit r12-6613-g15630e6e9eb019477d1fc5c0966b43979e18ae18
Author: Mikael Morin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103789
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mikael Morin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15630e6e9eb019477d1fc5c0966b43979e18ae18
commit r12-6613-g15630e6e9eb019477d1fc5c0966b43979e18ae18
Author: Mikael Morin
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87711
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mikael Morin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:15630e6e9eb019477d1fc5c0966b43979e18ae18
commit r12-6613-g15630e6e9eb019477d1fc5c0966b43979e18ae18
Author: Mikael Morin
Date: Sun
We're going to use the fast_float library in our (compiled-in)
floating-point std::from_chars implementation for faster and more
portable parsing of binary32/64 decimal strings.
The single file fast_float.h is an amalgamation of the entire library,
which can be (re)generated with the command
This makes fast_float handle the situation where std::from_chars is
specified to return result_out_of_range, i.e. when the parsed value
is outside the representable range of the floating-point type.
This adjusts fast_float's behavior in case of over/underflow: instead of
returning errc{} and
This makes our std::from_chars implementation use fast_float for parsing
chars_format::scientific/fixed/general parsing into binary32/64 values.
For other floating-point formats we still use the fallback implementation
that goes through the strtod family of functions.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
