Re: [PATCH] Add linker plugin API for processing plugin-added input files

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Cary Coutant wrote: >> 2017-09-21 Stephen Crane >> >> * plugin-api.h: Add new hook to the plugin transfer vector to >> support assigning plugin-generated sections to unique output >> segments. >>

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #9 from Matthias Klose --- yes, that's fixing it

Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR 82143: add a -fdefault-real-16 flag

2017-09-21 22:38 GMT+02:00 Steve Kargl : > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 09:10:42AM +0200, Janus Weil wrote: >> Attached is an updated patch, where I'm adding -fdefault-real-10 >> according to Steve's suggestion. As with -fdefault-real-8 and >> -fdefault-real-16, I'm

[Bug tree-optimization/82291] New: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/home/su/software/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 8.0.0 20170921 (experimental) [trunk

Re: Possible gcc 4.8.5 bug about RELOC_HIDE marcro in latest kernel code

在 9/21/2017 5:25 PM, Jia He Wrote: Hi Andrew, I tried centos 7.4 gcc 4.8.5-16, which seems to announce to fix this issue. And I checked the source code, the patch had been included in. My fault. All the gcc related rpms are needed to upgrade to 4.8.5-16(only upgrading gcc*.rpm is not

Re: [PATCH] [i386, libgcc] PR 82196 -mcall-ms2sysv-xlogues emits wrong AVX/SSE MOV

On 09/21/2017 05:18 PM, Daniel Santos wrote: > So libgcc doesn't use a config.in. :( Scratch that, I forgot that we're using gcc/config.in via auto-host.h.  So I only have to add this to gcc/configure.ac and it will be available for my libgcc header -- this is what I used to sniff out support for

[Bug rtl-optimization/82290] New: ICE at -O2 on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_flow_info failed

-linux-gnu/8.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/home/su/software/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 8.0.0 20170921 (experimental) [trunk revision 253084] (GCC) $ $ gcctk -Os

[Bug tree-optimization/82289] New: ICE at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: in vect_get_num_copies, at tree-vectorizer.h:1093

/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.0.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto --prefix=/home/su/software/tmp/gcc/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap Thread model: posix gcc version 8.0.0 20170921 (experimental) [trunk revision

[Bug libstdc++/82287] When compiling with O2 or O3, memory model rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82287 Geof Sawaya changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

Re: [PATCH] Add linker plugin API for processing plugin-added input files

> 2017-09-21 Stephen Crane > > * plugin-api.h: Add new hook to the plugin transfer vector to > support assigning plugin-generated sections to unique output > segments. > (ld_plugin_register_new_input): New hook. > (ld_plugin_tag): Add

[PATCH] Add linker plugin API for processing plugin-added input files

I'm looking to extend the linker plugin API to allow linker plugins the chance to assign sections to segments for sections in plugin-generated files. Currently the linker does not give the plugin the opportunity to call the unique_segment_for_sections interface for files generated by a plugin,

[Bug c++/82288] New: Defining a type in a parameter type of a lambda calling an undefined function results in a Segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82288 Bug ID: 82288 Summary: Defining a type in a parameter type of a lambda calling an undefined function results in a Segfault Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status:

Re: GCC Buildbot

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Paulo Matos wrote: > Interesting suggestion. I haven't had the opportunity to look at the > compile farm. However, it could be interesting to have a mix of workers: > native compile farm ones and some x86_64 doing cross compilation and > testing. Note that even without a

Re: GCC Buildbot

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Paulo Matos wrote: > I totally agree that only if people get involved in checking if there > were regressions and keeping an eye on what's going on are things going > to improve. The framework can help a lot here by notifying the right > people and the mailing list if

Re: [PATCH][RFC] Radically simplify emission of balanced tree for switch statements.

On 20 September 2017 17:00:13 CEST, Jeff Law wrote: >On 09/20/2017 01:24 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > >> >> Hello. >> >> Thank you Jeff for very verbose explanation what's happening. I'm >planning to do >> follow-up of this patch that will include clustering for bit-tests >and

[PATCH version 4, rs6000] Add builtins to convert from float/double to int/long using current rounding mode

GCC maintainers: The following patch has been updated to address Segher's comments. The patch. The new BU_FP_MISC_1 macro has been changed so gcc will gracefully exit when the command line option -msoft-float is used. I have tested the patch on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu (Power 8 LE). I

[Bug libstdc++/82287] New: When compiling with O2 or O3, memory model rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82287 Bug ID: 82287 Summary: When compiling with O2 or O3, memory model rejected Product: gcc Version: 4.9.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

gcc-7-20170921 is now available

Snapshot gcc-7-20170921 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7-20170921/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 7 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-7

Re: [PATCH] Rename existing insn_cost to insn_sched_cost

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:36:48PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Segher Boessenkool writes: > > haifa-sched exports an insn_cost function, but it is only used in a > > few places and specialised to scheduling. This patch renames it to > > insn_sched_cost. > > > >

Re: [PATCH] [i386, libgcc] PR 82196 -mcall-ms2sysv-xlogues emits wrong AVX/SSE MOV

On 09/21/2017 11:14 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Hi Daniel, > >> On 09/19/2017 01:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> What can be done in libgcc is detect in configure whether the assembler >>> supports AVX, and if not, provide some alternative (e.g. because the insns >>> are always the same, you could

[committed] Fix stack-clash protection failures for x86 Solaris

This fixes two issues that Rainer ran into on the x86 solaris port. The x86 Solaris port handles the frame pointer differently than other x86 ports. It requires frame pointers in cases that others do not -- it's a lot like aarch64 and just needed a trivial update to handle x86 solaris specially

[Bug tree-optimization/71702] dr_group_sort_cmp violates transitivity required for qsort

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71702 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/71702] dr_group_sort_cmp violates transitivity required for qsort

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71702 --- Comment #8 from Alexander Monakov --- Author: amonakov Date: Thu Sep 21 21:56:16 2017 New Revision: 253081 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253081=gcc=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/71702 Backport r230667 2015-11-20 Jim

Re: [PATCH] Rename existing insn_cost to insn_sched_cost

Segher Boessenkool writes: > haifa-sched exports an insn_cost function, but it is only used in a > few places and specialised to scheduling. This patch renames it to > insn_sched_cost. > > Okayed by Jeff at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg00202.html, >

Re: GCC Buildbot

On 21/09/17 14:18, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> >> If this is something of interest, then we will need to understand what >> is required, among those: >> >> - which machines we can use as workers: we certainly need more worker >> (previously known as slave) machines to test GCC in different >>

Re: GCC Buildbot

On 21/09/17 16:41, Martin Sebor wrote: > > The regression and the testresults lists are useful but not nearly > as much as they could be.  For one, the presentation isn't user > friendly (a matrix view would be much more informative).  But even > beyond it, rather than using the pull model

[PATCH, rs6000] folding of vector stores in GIMPLE

Hi, Folding of vector stores in GIMPLE. - Add code to handle gimple folding for the vec_st (vector store) builtins. - Remove the now obsoleted folding code for vec_st from rs6000-c-c. There are two spots that I could use some feedback on. First - An early exit remains in place

Re: GCC Buildbot

On 21/09/17 14:11, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi, > > First let me say I am also a fan of buildbot. I use it for a couple of > projects and it is really flexible, low on resources, easy to add new > builders/workers and easily extensible if you like python. > > On Thu, 2017-09-21 at 07:18 +0200,

Re: GCC Buildbot

On 21/09/17 02:27, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2017, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > >>> - buildbot can notify people if the build fails or if there's a test >>> regression. Notification can be sent to IRC and email for example. What >>> would people prefer to have as the settings for

Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR 82143: add a -fdefault-real-16 flag

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 09:10:42AM +0200, Janus Weil wrote: > Attached is an updated patch, where I'm adding -fdefault-real-10 > according to Steve's suggestion. As with -fdefault-real-8 and > -fdefault-real-16, I'm choosing to set the double kind to 16 in this > case. Also I'm renaming

Re: GCC Buildbot

On 21/09/17 01:01, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 05:01:55PM +0200, Paulo Matos wrote: >> This mail's intention is to gauge the interest of having a buildbot for >> GCC. > > +1. Or no, +100. > >> - which machines we can use as workers: we certainly need more

Re: [PATCH] tree-sra: fix compare_access_positions qsort comparator

Alexander Monakov writes: > diff --git a/gcc/tree-sra.c b/gcc/tree-sra.c > index 163b7a2d03b..4f9a8802aeb 100644 > --- a/gcc/tree-sra.c > +++ b/gcc/tree-sra.c > @@ -1542,19 +1542,17 @@ compare_access_positions (const void *a, const void > *b) > && TREE_CODE

Re: GCC Buildbot

On 20/09/17 19:14, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2017, Paulo Matos wrote: > >> - buildbot can notify people if the build fails or if there's a test >> regression. Notification can be sent to IRC and email for example. What >> would people prefer to have as the settings for notifications?

[PING][PATCH] Output DIEs for outlined OpenMP functions in correct lexical scope

Ping. On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 17:51:38 -0700 Kevin Buettner wrote: > On Wed, 10 May 2017 17:24:27 +0200 > Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > What I don't like is that the patch is inconsistent, it sets DECL_CONTEXT > > of the child function for all kinds of outlined

Re: GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 follow up: "Reviewed-by" etc.

On 09/21/2017 12:38 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On September 21, 2017 8:18:39 PM GMT+02:00, Carlos O'Donell > wrote: >> On 09/21/2017 11:56 AM, Richard Biener wrote: Not yet. >>> >>> I think given an OK from an official reviewer entitles you to commit >>> it indeed IS

[Bug c/82286] New: Wrong array subscript is above array bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82286 Bug ID: 82286 Summary: Wrong array subscript is above array bounds Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug fortran/82258] [8 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 4 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4=edit execution traces

[Bug fortran/82258] [8 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 --- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 42221 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42221=edit executable

[Bug fortran/82258] [8 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 42220 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42220=edit object file

[Bug fortran/82258] [8 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 --- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon --- Created attachment 42219 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42219=edit assembly file Compiled with -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions

[Bug fortran/82258] [8 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 --- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon --- The logs are not very helpful here is what I can see in gfortran.log: Execution timeout is: 300 spawn [open ...]^M Program aborted. Backtrace: qemu: uncaught target signal 6 (Aborted) - core dumped I

[Bug testsuite/81539] Bad target in new test case gcc.target/powerpc/mmx-packuswb-1.c from r250432

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81539 Steven Munroe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug ipa/81360] [8 Regression] ice in estimate_edge_growth, at ipa-inline.h:86

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81360 --- Comment #4 from David Binderman --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #3) > (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2) > > Confirmed, started with r250048. > > Still going wrong, nearly a month later. Still broken another month

[Bug target/43763] segfault when using by -mwarn-cell-microcode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43763 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/82275] gfortran rejects valid & accepts invalid reference to dimension-remapped type SELECT TYPE selector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82275 --- Comment #3 from Damian Rouson --- Thanks for looking at this. Once there's a fix, it would be great if it could be back-ported to GCC 7 as well.

[Bug fortran/82258] [8 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c/82285] New: Optimizing error when using enumeration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82285 Bug ID: 82285 Summary: Optimizing error when using enumeration Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

Re: Backtrace library [3/3]

On 21.09.2017 17:50, Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:52 AM, Thomas Schwinge > wrote: >> >> On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:20:08 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: [libbacktrace] >> >>> I won't commit for a day or two in case

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #8 from Matthias Klose --- starting a build before heading to bed ...

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor --- Probably fixed the bug on trunk. Want to try the patch I just committed?

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #6 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: ian Date: Thu Sep 21 18:44:39 2017 New Revision: 253078 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253078=gcc=rev Log: PR go/82284 * elf.c (backtrace_initialize): Set

libbacktrace patch committed: Fix uninitialized field

I somehow failed to initialize the exe_filename field of phdr_data, which most likely led to PR 82284. Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace tests for this obvious fix. Committed to mainline. Ian 2017-09-21 Ian Lance Taylor PR go/82284 * elf.c (backtrace_initialize): Set

[Bug fortran/82258] [8 regression] allocate_zerosize_3.f fails since r251949

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #5 from Matthias Klose --- I checked with trunk 20170917, but I backported your patch for PR sanitizer/77631 to the gcc-7-branch. I'm building current trunk now. So sthis is a 8, not 7 regression.

Re: [Patch, fortran] Bug fixes, including regressions, for the associate construct

Dear Jerry, Thanks! Committed as revision 253077. Cheers Paul On 21 September 2017 at 01:52, Jerry DeLisle wrote: > On 09/20/2017 09:45 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: >> In the last update to the Parameterized Derived Types implementation, >> I fixed PR60483 as a side

[Bug tree-optimization/78512] [7 Regression] r242674 miscompiles Linux kernel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78512 --- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Sep 21 18:40:21 2017 New Revision: 253077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253077=gcc=rev Log: 2017-09-21 Paul Thomas PR fortran/52832 *

[Bug fortran/80120] [7/8 Regression] Incorrect error with associate construct and character array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80120 --- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Sep 21 18:40:21 2017 New Revision: 253077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253077=gcc=rev Log: 2017-09-21 Paul Thomas PR fortran/52832 *

[Bug fortran/81903] [OOP] problem with ASSOCIATE and class pointer (Invalid character in name at)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81903 --- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Sep 21 18:40:21 2017 New Revision: 253077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253077=gcc=rev Log: 2017-09-21 Paul Thomas PR fortran/52832 *

[Bug fortran/82121] [7/8 Regression] Unclassifiable statement during compilation when assigning to a Character array in a derived type contained in a ASSOCIATE statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82121 --- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Sep 21 18:40:21 2017 New Revision: 253077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253077=gcc=rev Log: 2017-09-21 Paul Thomas PR fortran/52832 *

[Bug fortran/78152] [6/7/8 Regression] coarray and associate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78152 --- Comment #14 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Sep 21 18:40:21 2017 New Revision: 253077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253077=gcc=rev Log: 2017-09-21 Paul Thomas PR fortran/52832 *

[Bug fortran/67543] ICE on associate with improper association

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67543 --- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Sep 21 18:40:21 2017 New Revision: 253077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253077=gcc=rev Log: 2017-09-21 Paul Thomas PR fortran/52832 *

[Bug fortran/52832] [F03] ASSOCIATE construct with proc-pointer selector is rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52832 --- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas --- Author: pault Date: Thu Sep 21 18:40:21 2017 New Revision: 253077 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253077=gcc=rev Log: 2017-09-21 Paul Thomas PR fortran/52832 *

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor --- (Never mind, it's my elf.c that has the local changes. Sorry.)

Re: GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 follow up: "Reviewed-by" etc.

On September 21, 2017 8:18:39 PM GMT+02:00, Carlos O'Donell wrote: >On 09/21/2017 11:56 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> Not yet. >> >> I think given an OK from an official reviewer entitles you to commit >> it indeed IS matching the formal statement. It better does... > >Isn't

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor --- Your line numbers in libbacktrace/elf.c do not match the ones on trunk. Do you have local patches to that file?

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor --- This is most likely due to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-09/msg01412.html .

[Bug fortran/82275] gfortran rejects valid & accepts invalid reference to dimension-remapped type SELECT TYPE selector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82275 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|gfortran rejects valid &|gfortran rejects valid &

Re: GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 follow up: "Reviewed-by" etc.

On 09/21/2017 11:56 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> Not yet. > > I think given an OK from an official reviewer entitles you to commit > it indeed IS matching the formal statement. It better does... Isn't it better to be explicit about this; rather than assuming? >> All of this is nothing compared

[PATCH, rs6000] testcase coverage for vector store builtins

Hi, Add testcase coverage for the vec_st (vector store) intrinsic builtins. Tested across power platforms (p6 and newer). OK for trunk? Thanks, -Will [gcc/testsuite] 2017-09-21 Will Schmidt * gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-st-char.c: New.

[Bug go/82284] [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 --- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose --- looks like there are no go or libgo specific changes

Re: GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 follow up: "Reviewed-by" etc.

On September 21, 2017 7:38:29 PM GMT+02:00, Carlos O'Donell wrote: >On 09/21/2017 10:50 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: >> So my question is, if I've gotten a patch reviewed by someone who is >not >> yet ;-) familiar with that new process, and I nevertheless want to >> acknowledge

[Bug target/82242] IRA spills allocno in loop body if it crosses throwing call outside the loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82242 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|x86_64 bad optimization |IRA spills allocno in loop

[Bug go/82284] New: [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82284 Bug ID: 82284 Summary: [7 Regression] go -version segfaults on big endian architectures Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libquadmath/81848] Add PowerPC support to libquadmath

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81848 Michael Meissner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

Re: GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 follow up: "Reviewed-by" etc.

On 09/21/2017 10:50 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > So my question is, if I've gotten a patch reviewed by someone who is not > yet ;-) familiar with that new process, and I nevertheless want to > acknowledge their time invested in review by putting "Reviewed-by" into > the commit log, is it fine to

Re: [committed][PATCH] Stack clash protection patch 04/08 - V4

On 09/21/2017 02:38 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Jeff Law writes: > >> This patch introduces the x86 stack clash protected prologue support as >> well as the tests. I believe the only change since V3 was the more >> aggressive introduction of scheduling barriers. It also enables

[PATCH] tree-sra: fix compare_access_positions qsort comparator

Hi, The compare_access_positions qsort comparator lacks transitivity, although somewhat surprisingly this issue didn't manifest on 64-bit x86 bootstraps. The first invalid comparison step is here (tree-sra.c:1545): /* Put the integral type with the bigger precision first. */ else if

[Bug c/81882] attribute ifunc documentation uses invalid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81882 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED See Also|

[Bug c/81882] attribute ifunc documentation uses invalid code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81882 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- Author: msebor Date: Thu Sep 21 17:19:16 2017 New Revision: 253076 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253076=gcc=rev Log: PR c/81882 - attribute ifunc documentation uses invalid code gcc/ChangeLog:

Re: PING^2: Fwd: SSA range class and removal of VR_ANTI_RANGEs

On September 20, 2017 1:10:25 AM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote: >On 07/26/2017 05:20 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Andrew MacLeod >wrote: >>> On 07/25/2017 03:12 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 9:30 PM,

Re: [PATCH] C++: underline parameters in mismatching function calls

On 09/20/2017 01:52 PM, David Malcolm wrote: When we have a type mismatch in a C++ function call, e.g. extern int callee (int one, const char *two, float three); int caller (int first, int second, float third) { return callee (first, second, third); } we currently emit something

GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 follow up: "Reviewed-by" etc.

Hi! Sending this to the "main" GNU tools mailing lists. Of course, that's not meant to exclude other tools. Amongst other things ;-) at the GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 we discussed whether having a "Reviewed-by" tag in the commit log might provide an incentive for more people to invest time in

[Bug c/82283] New: Wrong warning with -Wmissing-field-initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82283 Bug ID: 82283 Summary: Wrong warning with -Wmissing-field-initializers Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

Re: GCC Buildbot

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > And it has the basic problem of all automatic testing: that in the long > run everyone simply ignores it. Hence, see my comments about the value of having someone who monitors the results and files bugs / notifies patch authors / fixes issues.

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #57 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #56) > > --- Comment #55 from simon at pushface dot org --- > > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #54) > > > >> I bootstrapped r252936 on x86-64

[Bug tree-optimization/82282] New: PRE cannot blindly fold integer-to-pointer/pointer-to-integer round-trips

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82282 Bug ID: 82282 Summary: PRE cannot blindly fold integer-to-pointer/pointer-to-integer round-trips Product: gcc Version: 6.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #56 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #55 from simon at pushface dot org --- > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #54) > >> I bootstrapped r252936 on x86-64 Darwin15.6 (10.11.6), it would be good if >>

Re: Possible gcc 4.8.5 bug about RELOC_HIDE marcro in latest kernel code

Hi Justin, > The 4.8.5 is default gcc version for centos 7.x If there is no newer version available you should talk to your distro. It is worth reporting this bug to them as more of their users may be affected by it. Wilco

Re: [committed][PATCH] Stack clash protection patch 04/08 - V4

On 09/21/2017 02:38 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Jeff Law writes: > >> This patch introduces the x86 stack clash protected prologue support as >> well as the tests. I believe the only change since V3 was the more >> aggressive introduction of scheduling barriers. It also enables

[Bug target/82274] __builtin_mul_overflow fails to detect overflow for int64_t when compiled with -m32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82274 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- internal-fn.c implements here whatever we have written in libgcc2.c for __mulvti3 (for 64-bit arches) or __mulvdi3 (for 32-bit arches). And it seems this is (hopefully the only) incorrectly handled special

Re: [PATCH] C++: underline parameters in mismatching function calls

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 3:52 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > + /* If we have a method, then DECL_ARGUMENTS begins with "this"; > + increment ARGNUM to skip it. */ > + if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (fndecl)) == METHOD_TYPE) > +argnum++; > + > + /* Locate param by index

[Bug target/80556] [8 Regression] bootstrap failure for Ada compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80556 --- Comment #55 from simon at pushface dot org --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #54) > I bootstrapped r252936 on x86-64 Darwin15.6 (10.11.6), it would be good if > folks could check it out. bootstrapped r252935 on 10.11.6:

Re: Impact of bugs on different versions.

El 21 set 2017, a les 17:50, Martin Sebor va escriure: > > On 09/21/2017 06:22 AM, Vicent Brocal wrote: >> For a C standalone application (no libs) I selected the following >> components: c, inline-asm, ipa, preprocessor, regression, >> rtl-optimization, target,

Re: [PATCH] C++: underline parameters in mismatching function calls

On 09/20/2017 12:52 PM, David Malcolm wrote: When we have a type mismatch in a C++ function call, e.g. whereas underlining the mismatching things would make the messages easier to comprehend: test.c: In function 'int caller(int, int, float)': test.c:5:38: error: invalid conversion from

Re: [PATCH] [i386, libgcc] PR 82196 -mcall-ms2sysv-xlogues emits wrong AVX/SSE MOV

Hi Daniel, > On 09/19/2017 01:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> What can be done in libgcc is detect in configure whether the assembler >> supports AVX, and if not, provide some alternative (e.g. because the insns >> are always the same, you could just code them as .byte or something similar). >> >>

[demangler PATCH]: eliding template return types

Guys in cc: you've looked at demangling sometime in the past, so may have an opinion. As alluded to in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-09/msg01482.html we display the return type of template functions containing local objects. This gets easily confused with the return type of the

[Bug target/82281] New: Bulldozer/Zen tuning: uses XMM for single 64-bit integer AND, even with a simple mask

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82281 Bug ID: 82281 Summary: Bulldozer/Zen tuning: uses XMM for single 64-bit integer AND, even with a simple mask Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug demangler/82195] Undemangleable lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82195 --- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell --- Author: nathan Date: Thu Sep 21 15:52:31 2017 New Revision: 253075 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253075=gcc=rev Log: [demangler PATCH]: Revert and update generic lambda demangling

[demangler PATCH]: Revert and update generic lambda demangling

My recent change to generic lambda demangling was incorrect. It wrapped the function type inside the local name, which allowed the printer to see the correct set of template parameters (and not recurse). Except there was a hack to not do that at the outer most level. but that still ends up

Re: Impact of bugs on different versions.

On 09/21/2017 06:22 AM, Vicent Brocal wrote: For a C standalone application (no libs) I selected the following components: c, inline-asm, ipa, preprocessor, regression, rtl-optimization, target, tree-optimization. Am I missing any that could be relevant? A search only filtering for these

  1   2   3   >