[Bug c++/85071] The g++ delete the memory alloced by new operator before I manually delete it.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85071 --- Comment #3 from wierton <141242068 at smail dot nju.edu.cn> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2) > Both valgrind and AddressSanitizer would have found this bug, you should use > them. I feel so sorry to post this stupid code. I

[Bug testsuite/80546] [7/8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/bool3-p[78].c scan-assembler-not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80546 --- Comment #11 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #10) > My bootstrap/regtesting of this patch is still running. Ok, the bootstrap and regtesting came back clean and both bool3-p[78].c tests cases now PASS.

[Bug rtl-optimization/84878] ICE: Segmentation fault (in add_cross_iteration_register_deps)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED URL|

[PATCH, rtl] Fix PR84878: Segmentation fault in add_cross_iteration_register_deps

PR84878 shows an example where we segv while creating data dependence edges for SMS. ddg.c:add_cross_iteration_register_deps(): /* Create inter-loop true dependences and anti dependences. */ for (r_use = DF_REF_CHAIN (last_def); r_use != NULL; r_use = r_use->next) { rtx_insn

[Bug testsuite/80546] [7/8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/bool3-p[78].c scan-assembler-not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80546 --- Comment #10 from Peter Bergner --- Created attachment 43764 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43764=edit Alternate patch for PR80546 Mike created the vsx_mov_* patterns, so I asked him why he disparaged the GPR moves. He

[Bug testsuite/80546] [7/8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/bool3-p[78].c scan-assembler-not

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80546 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||meissner at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug rtl-optimization/85072] g++ -O1 consumes all memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85072 --- Comment #4 from Vladimir Makarov --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > Doing a more "correct" patch like below shows that nearly all possible > "starts" are covered: > > (gdb) p bitmap_count_bits(starts) > $2 = 500039 > (gdb) p

[Bug c/82272] RFE: request a warning for ( == ) etc.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82272 --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- I submitted N2229 to WG14: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2229.htm I also opened Glibc bug for isdigit() et al. referenced in the paper:

[Bug target/58684] powerpc uses only unordered floating-point compares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58684 --- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool --- Patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-03/msg01405.html .

[Bug target/58684] powerpc uses only unordered floating-point compares

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58684 --- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool --- *** Bug 84366 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug target/84366] gcc.dg/torture/float128-cmp-invalid.c fails when run on power9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84366 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/85087] call to a non-const member function on a const lvalue accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85087 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid --- Comment #1 from

[Bug c++/85087] New: call to a non-const member function on a const lvalue accepted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85087 Bug ID: 85087 Summary: call to a non-const member function on a const lvalue accepted Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/84774] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wrestrict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84774 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/84905] Improve warning for __attribute__((const)) on function returning void

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84905 --- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4) > Resolving as Won't Fix based on comment #2. (I will update > gcc-8/changes.html before the release and may update the documentation of > attribute const in the

[Bug fortran/80645] FAIL: gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_3.f90 -O1 (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80645 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/85085] [8 regression] Test case gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_3.f90 fails with __builtin_memcpy warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85085 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/448] -related issues (C99 issues)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=448 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Last reconfirmed|2008-04-15

[Bug target/83638] atomic_is_lock_free should return false on pa-risc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83638 --- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2018-03-26 2:23 PM, mikulas at artax dot karlin.mff.cuni.cz wrote: > If the userspace wants to optimize different code paths for lockless atomics > and for locked atomics, atomic_is_lock_free

[Bug testsuite/83462] [8 regression] c-c++-common/Warray-bounds-3.c fails on arm-none-eabi

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83462 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c/84175] FAIL: c-c++-common/Warray-bounds-4.c -Wc++-compat strcpy (test for warnings, line 67)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84175 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED See Also|

RFA: Need to extend x86 psABI to support thread cancellation and alternate signal stack

On Linux, when alternate signal stack is used with thread cancellation, _Unwind_Resume fails when it tries to unwind shadow stack from signal handler on alternate signal stack. The issue is that signal handler on alternate signal stack uses a separate shadow stack and we must switch to the

[Bug tree-optimization/79958] Missed tree DSE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79958 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #3

[Bug libgcc/85086] New: _Unwind_Resume can't unwind shadow stack with thread cancellation and alternate signal stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85086 Bug ID: 85086 Summary: _Unwind_Resume can't unwind shadow stack with thread cancellation and alternate signal stack Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug rtl-optimization/80791] [8 regression] test case gcc.dg/sms-1.c fail2 starting with r247885

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791 --- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt --- It's not clear yet what we should do with this. It looks like SMS is able to figure out that the sign-extension is not needed in the pre-r247885 code, but can't sort this out with the IVOPTS change. The

[PATCH,nvptx] Fix PR85056

As noted in PR85056, the nvptx BE isn't declaring external arrays using PTX array notation. Specifically, it's emitting code that's missing the empty angle brackets '[]'. This patch corrects that problem. Tom, in contrast to my earlier patch in the PR, this patch only considers external arrays.

[Bug middle-end/85085] New: [8 regression] Test case gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_3.f90 fails with __builtin_memcpy warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85085 Bug ID: 85085 Summary: [8 regression] Test case gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_3.f90 fails with __builtin_memcpy warnings Product: gcc Version: 8.0

[Bug fortran/85083] [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:2915

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85083 --- Comment #3 from Harald Anlauf --- Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2018-03/msg00197.html

[PATCH, fortran] PR85083 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:2915

The attached obvious one-liner adds a missing check for type compatibility in a structure constructor. Testcase from report. Changelogs below. Regtested on i686-pc-linux-gnu. Whoever reviews this, please feel free to commit. Thanks, Harald 2018-03-26 Harald Anlauf

[Bug middle-end/83665] [8 regression] Big code size regression and some code quality improvement at Jan 2 2018

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83665 Pat Haugen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/85082] [8 Regression] ICE with -Ofast in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:2624

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85082 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/85083] [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:2915

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85083 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug c/84175] FAIL: c-c++-common/Warray-bounds-4.c -Wc++-compat strcpy (test for warnings, line 67)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84175 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target|hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa64-hp-hpux11.11,

[Bug target/83638] atomic_is_lock_free should return false on pa-risc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83638 --- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2018-03-26 2:23 PM, mikulas at artax dot karlin.mff.cuni.cz wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83638 > > --- Comment #2 from mikulas at artax dot karlin.mff.cuni.cz --- >

[Bug c/448] -related issues (C99 issues)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=448 --- Comment #38 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- I think the correct state is NEW. There is a well-defined set of target OSes that lack the target macro definitions describing those targets' stdint.h types, each of which should be

RE: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf-protection=branch -mibt

> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 5:59 PM > To: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak > Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf- >

[Bug fortran/85083] [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:2915

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85083 Harald Anlauf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #1

Re: RFC: Disable asan tests under ulimit -v

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 08:33:41PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Mär 26 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > if [catch {exec sh ulimit -v} ulimit_v] { > > expect1.1> exec sh ulimit -v > sh: ulimit: No such file or directory > while executing > "exec sh ulimit -v"

Re: RFC: Disable asan tests under ulimit -v

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Mär 26 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 08:33:41PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: >>> On Mär 26 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: >>> >>> > if [catch {exec sh

[Bug fortran/85084] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE: out of memory allocating 18446744073709551600 bytes ...

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85084 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug target/84878] ICE: Segmentation fault (in add_cross_iteration_register_deps)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878 --- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner --- So we segv in ddg.c:add_cross_iteration_register_deps() at this code: /* Create inter-loop true dependences and anti dependences. */ for (r_use = DF_REF_CHAIN (last_def); r_use != NULL; r_use =

[Bug target/85073] [x86] extra check after BLSR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85073 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[PATCH, i386]: Fix PR 85073: extra check after BLSR

2018-03-26 Uros Bizjak PR target/85073 * config/i386/i386.md (*bmi_blsr__cmp): New insn pattern. (*bmi_blsr__ccz): Ditto. testsuite/ChangeLog: 2018-03-26 Uros Bizjak PR target/85073 * gcc.target/i386/pr85073.c: New test.

libgo patch committed: Don't check for a stale runtime

The runtime tests, as expected by the gotools testsuite, check whether the runtime package is stale. The gccgo runtime package can never be stale, and checking for staleness can cause confusion if it winds up checking the gc package instead. Skip the test for gccgo. Bootstrapped and ran Go

[Bug target/85073] [x86] extra check after BLSR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85073 --- Comment #1 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Mon Mar 26 19:26:19 2018 New Revision: 258864 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258864=gcc=rev Log: PR target/85073 * config/i386/i386.md (*bmi_blsr__cmp): New

[Bug ipa/83983] FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr83121 (test for LTO warnings, pr83121_0.C line 8)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83983 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target|hppa-unknown-linux-gnu, |hppa-unknown-linux-gnu,

[Bug fortran/85084] New: [6/7/8 Regression] ICE: out of memory allocating 18446744073709551600 bytes ...

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85084 Bug ID: 85084 Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] ICE: out of memory allocating 18446744073709551600 bytes ... Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[RFC PATCH for 9] rs6000: Ordered comparisons (PR56864)

This implements ordered comparisons for most floating point variants. It does not yet implement it for XL-compatible FP comparisons. I do not yet know if it works correctly for emulated 128-bit IEEE FP. There should not be performance impact, but I haven't tested it thoroughly yet. Segher

[Bug fortran/85083] New: [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:2915

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85083 Bug ID: 85083 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:2915 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status:

[Bug fortran/85082] New: [8 Regression] ICE with -Ofast in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:2624

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85082 Bug ID: 85082 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE with -Ofast in vn_reference_insert_pieces, at tree-ssa-sccvn.c:2624 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

Re: RFC: Disable asan tests under ulimit -v

On Mär 26 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 08:33:41PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> On Mär 26 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: >> >> > if [catch {exec sh ulimit -v} ulimit_v] { >> >> expect1.1> exec sh ulimit -v >> sh: ulimit: No such

Re: RFC: Disable asan tests under ulimit -v

On Mär 26 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: > if [catch {exec sh ulimit -v} ulimit_v] { expect1.1> exec sh ulimit -v sh: ulimit: No such file or directory while executing "exec sh ulimit -v" Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7

Successful bootstrap and install of gcc (GCC) 7.3.0 on armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi

Hi, Here's a report of a successful build and install of GCC: $ gcc-7.3.0/config.guess armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi $ newcompiler/bin/gcc -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=newcompiler/bin/gcc

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 84632 ("[8 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected record_type or union_type or qual_union_type, have array_type in reduced_constant_expression_p...")

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > > On 26/03/2018 19:12, Jason Merrill wrote: >> >> Your build_aggr_init change is OK, but I had in mind something more >> general in build_vec_init: > > Oh nice. Shall I test it together with my build_aggr_type

Re: RFC: Disable asan tests under ulimit -v

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Mär 26 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 4:51 AM, Andreas Schwab >> wrote: >>> On Mär 23 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: >>> diff

[Bug target/83638] atomic_is_lock_free should return false on pa-risc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83638 --- Comment #2 from mikulas at artax dot karlin.mff.cuni.cz --- >From performance point of view it doesn't matter if the lock is taken inside the kernel or inside the gcc library. If the userspace wants to optimize different code paths for

IBM Users Contact List

Hi, We are glad to inform you about our recent list release of IBM Users Contact List and we are know to learn your interest in acquiring the list. Likewise we can provide the information on IBM products as Well such as: IBM Watson, Mainframes, IBM as400, IBM Tivoli, IBM marketing cloud, IBM

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 84632 ("[8 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected record_type or union_type or qual_union_type, have array_type in reduced_constant_expression_p...")

Hi, On 26/03/2018 19:12, Jason Merrill wrote: Your build_aggr_init change is OK, but I had in mind something more general in build_vec_init: Oh nice. Shall I test it together with my build_aggr_type bits and the testcases and commit it if everything is Ok? By the way - FYI - what I had tested

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #68 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #67) > On March 26, 2018 2:46:08 PM GMT+02:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" > wrote: >

[Bug c/39808] warn_unused_result fails to produce warning in a statement expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39808 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|dave.pagan

[Bug middle-end/82004] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 628.pop2_s miscompare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82004 --- Comment #35 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 43763 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43763=edit pr82004_dumps.tar.xz Dumps. For lto I've just added the init_sw_absorption function parts of the dump, the dumps

[Bug lto/81968] [8 regression] early lto debug objects make Solaris ld SEGV

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 --- Comment #67 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On March 26, 2018 2:46:08 PM GMT+02:00, "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968 > >--- Comment #66 from Jakub Jelinek ---

[Bug c/55976] -Werror=return-type should error on returning a value from a void function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55976 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|dave.pagan

[Bug middle-end/82004] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 628.pop2_s miscompare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82004 --- Comment #34 from Jakub Jelinek --- Ok, I can now reproduce, but only with -flto, not without that. Without -flto, before pre I see: [local count: 85892]: # logchl_591 = PHI <-3.0097868371792719699442386627197265625e+0(33),

Re: RFC: Disable asan tests under ulimit -v

On Mär 26 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 4:51 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> On Mär 23 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: >> >>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/asan.exp >>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/asan.exp >>>

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/85032, rejects-valid with if constexpr in template

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > Recently the code in finish_static_assert was changed to use > perform_implicit_conversion_flags followed by fold_non_dependent_expr. That > broke this test becase when in a template, p_i_c_f merely wraps the expr in >

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 84632 ("[8 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check: expected record_type or union_type or qual_union_type, have array_type in reduced_constant_expression_p...")

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 5:19 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > On 23/03/2018 13:39, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 6:13 AM, Paolo Carlini >> wrote: >>> >>> On 22/03/2018 23:26, Jason Merrill wrote: On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at

Re: [og7] vector_length extension part 4: target hooks and automatic parallelism

On 03/02/2018 08:18 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: The attached patch adjusts the existing goacc validate_dims target hook This is overkill. All we need is a function "int oacc_get_default_dim (int dim)". Thanks, - Tom

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/85062, ICE with variadic alignas in wrong place

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 11:57 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > We've been passing C++11 attributes that appertain to a type-specifier > down to decl_attributes, which gave a warning and ignored them, but it > was confused by the pack expansion. It seems easiest to deal with > this by

[Bug sanitizer/85081] New: [7(8 Regression] Sanitizer error with references in vectorized/parallel for-loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85081 Bug ID: 85081 Summary: [7(8 Regression] Sanitizer error with references in vectorized/parallel for-loop Product: gcc Version: 8.0.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

Re: [og7] vector_length extension part 4: target hooks and automatic parallelism

On 03/02/2018 08:18 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: introduces a new goacc adjust_parallelism target hook. That's another separate patch. Committed. Thanks, - Tom [openacc] Add target hook TARGET_GOACC_ADJUST_PARALLELISM 2018-03-26 Cesar Philippidis Tom de Vries

Re: RFC: Disable asan tests under ulimit -v

On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 4:51 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Mär 23 2018, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/asan.exp >> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/asan.exp >> index 4ee8dd98697..a22d2ac5e20 100644 >> ---

[Bug c++/85062] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE on alignas with parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85062 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Mon Mar 26 16:30:41 2018 New Revision: 258859 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258859=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/85062 - ICE with alignas in wrong place. * decl.c

[Bug target/85080] [8 regression] gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-pr37194.c fails starting with r248678

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85080 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target||powerpc64*-*-*

[Bug target/85080] New: [8 regression] gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-pr37194.c fails starting with r248678

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85080 Bug ID: 85080 Summary: [8 regression] gcc.dg/vect/costmodel/ppc/costmodel-pr37194.c fails starting with r248678 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status:

[Bug libstdc++/28457] ext/pb_ds/regression/tree_data_map_rand.cc fails with a particular random seed.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28457 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug lto/85078] LTO ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl minimal' structure, have 'identifier_node' in decl_mangling_context, at cp/mangle.c:878

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85078 --- Comment #1 from Franz Sirl --- The ICE was introduced between r257623 and r257685.

Re: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf-protection=branch -mibt

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 8:23 AM, Tsimbalist, Igor V wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Lu, Hongjiu >> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2018 12:50 AM >> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak ; Tsimbalist, >> Igor V

C++ PATCH for c++/85062, ICE with variadic alignas in wrong place

We've been passing C++11 attributes that appertain to a type-specifier down to decl_attributes, which gave a warning and ignored them, but it was confused by the pack expansion. It seems easiest to deal with this by ignoring them directly in grokdeclarator. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying

[Bug c++/85071] The g++ delete the memory alloced by new operator before I manually delete it.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85071 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Both valgrind and AddressSanitizer would have found this bug, you should use them.

[Bug c++/85071] The g++ delete the memory alloced by new operator before I manually delete it.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85071 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/84737] [8 Regression] 20% degradation in CPU2000 172.mgrid starting with r256888

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84737 --- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor --- I guess you'll need to check whether it is PR 55334 (i.e. not preserving restrict accross ipa-cp and/or inlining) coming back somehow...

[Bug target/84786] [miscompilation] vunpcklpd accessing xmm16-22 targeting KNL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84786 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- For 7.x I think we need: --- gcc/config/i386/sse.md.jj 2018-03-05 17:04:45.820743323 +0100 +++ gcc/config/i386/sse.md 2018-03-26 17:29:00.967880855 +0200 @@ -10687,7 +10687,7 @@ [(set

[Bug target/84878] ICE: Segmentation fault (in add_cross_iteration_register_deps)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84878 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/85079] New: Segfault While Compiling DXX-Rebirth Project

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85079 Bug ID: 85079 Summary: Segfault While Compiling DXX-Rebirth Project Product: gcc Version: 7.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug libstdc++/84654] libstdc++ tries to use __float128 when compiling with -mno-float128

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84654 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #2 from Jonathan

[Bug target/84786] [miscompilation] vunpcklpd accessing xmm16-22 targeting KNL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84786 --- Comment #11 from Matthias Kretz --- Created attachment 43762 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43762=edit test case that produces incorrect vpsrlw Compiled with `g++-7 -std=c++17 -O0 -fabi-version=0 -fabi-compat-version=0

RE: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf-protection=branch -mibt

> -Original Message- > From: Lu, Hongjiu > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2018 12:50 AM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak ; Tsimbalist, > Igor V > Subject: [PATCH] i386: Insert ENDBR to trampoline for -fcf- > protection=branch -mibt > >

Re: [PATCHv2] PR libstdc++/84654 Do not use __float128 if it is disabled by the compiler

Ping? Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho writes: > Changes since v1: > - Completely rewrite of the patch to set ENABLE_FLOAT128 at libstdc++ >build time and undef _GLIBCXX_USE_FLOAT128 when building user code. > > --- 8< --- > > In order to use __float128 in C++

[Bug target/84786] [miscompilation] vunpcklpd accessing xmm16-22 targeting KNL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84786 --- Comment #10 from Matthias Kretz --- This is all I have right now: TID 0 SDE-ERROR: Executed instruction not valid for specified chip (KNL): 0x70d281: vpsrlw xmm0, xmm0, xmm16 Image:

[Bug middle-end/82004] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 628.pop2_s miscompare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82004 --- Comment #33 from Andrey Guskov --- This is the full execution line I used to produce the log in question, and with which the test continues failing: $ gfortran -fdump-tree-all -fdump-rtl-all -m64 -c -o sw_absorption.fppized.o

[Bug middle-end/82004] [8 Regression] SPEC CPU2017 628.pop2_s miscompare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82004 --- Comment #32 from Andrey Guskov --- Created attachment 43761 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43761=edit Dump as requested in #c31 Jakub, see the attachment. This is the log of what I get, packed in 7Z. At a glance, the

[Bug target/84786] [miscompilation] vunpcklpd accessing xmm16-22 targeting KNL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84786 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Matthias Kretz from comment #8) > There seems to be a similar bug for vpsrlw and vpsllw. Do you need a > testcase? (It's hard to hit the bug... just had one occur on a Travis CI > build) I

[Bug c++/85062] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE on alignas with parameter pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85062 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/85049] [8 Regression] Internal compiler error with __integer_pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85049 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Mon Mar 26 14:37:50 2018 New Revision: 258856 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258856=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/85049 - ICE with __integer_pack. * pt.c

[Bug c++/85049] [8 Regression] Internal compiler error with __integer_pack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85049 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

C++ PATCH for c++/85049, ICE with integer_sequence

In this testcase, we tried to deduce template arguments between __integer_pack(sizeof...(_Types)) and an empty argument list. This breaks, and we shouldn't try anyway, since that's very much a non-deduced context. So let's skip over packs that aren't actual template parameter packs. Tested

[Bug lto/85078] New: LTO ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl minimal' structure, have 'identifier_node' in decl_mangling_context, at cp/mangle.c:878

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85078 Bug ID: 85078 Summary: LTO ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl minimal' structure, have 'identifier_node' in decl_mangling_context, at cp/mangle.c:878

Re: [og7] vector_length extension part 4: target hooks and automatic parallelism

On 03/26/2018 07:14 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 03/02/2018 08:18 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> diff --git a/gcc/omp-offload.c b/gcc/omp-offload.c >> index ba3f4317f4e..f15ce6b8f8d 100644 >> --- a/gcc/omp-offload.c >> +++ b/gcc/omp-offload.c >> @@ -626,7 +626,8 @@ oacc_parse_default_dims (const

Re: [og7] vector_length extension part 4: target hooks and automatic parallelism

On 03/02/2018 08:18 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: diff --git a/gcc/omp-offload.c b/gcc/omp-offload.c index ba3f4317f4e..f15ce6b8f8d 100644 --- a/gcc/omp-offload.c +++ b/gcc/omp-offload.c @@ -626,7 +626,8 @@ oacc_parse_default_dims (const char *dims) function. */ static void

  1   2   >