https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97302
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 49311
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49311=edit
Output from the attempt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97302
Bug ID: 97302
Summary: FreeBSD build fails with
contrib/download_prerequisites with missing gmp.h
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95189
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||9.3.0
Known to work|9.3.0
On October 6, 2020 3:15:02 AM GMT+02:00, Alexandre Oliva
wrote:
>
>This is a first step towards enabling the sincos optimization in Ada.
>
>The issue this patch solves is that sincos takes the type to be looked
>up with mathfn_built_in from variables or temporaries in which results
>of sin and
On 10/1/20 1:08 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This PR points out that when we're invoking a non-static member function
on a null instance during constant evaluation, we should reject.
cxx_eval_call_expression calls cxx_bind_parameters_in_call which
evaluates function arguments, but it won't detect
I thought LWG approved the other option in the PR (changing views::join to
not use CTAD)?
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 10:22 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches <
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> This implements the proposed resolution for LWG 3474.
>
> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>
> *
On 10/5/20 4:16 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 10/5/20 8:50 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
[Martin, as the original author of this pass, do you have any concerns?]
@@ -1270,7 +1271,21 @@ get_size_range (tree exp, tree range[2], bool
allow_zero /* = false */)
enum
This is a first step towards enabling the sincos optimization in Ada.
The issue this patch solves is that sincos takes the type to be looked
up with mathfn_built_in from variables or temporaries in which results
of sin and cos are stored. In Ada, sin and cos are declared in an
internal aux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97301
Bug ID: 97301
Summary: [11 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/sse-movlps-1.c
fails after r11-3434
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
This Go frontend patch by Nikhil Benesch fixes the file reading logic
in the Stream_from_file class. That class is almost never used, and I
guess nobody noticed these problems. Bootstrapped and ran Go
testsuite on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
Ian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95189
--- Comment #18 from Luke Dashjr ---
Someone pointed out to me that the bug metadata says "Known to work: 9.3.0"
On 06/10/20 00:25 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I'm sorry it's taken a year to review this properly. Comments below ...
On 27/09/19 14:18 -0400, Daniel Lemire wrote:
(This is a revised patch proposal. I am revising both the description
and the code itself.)
Even on recent processors, integer
On 06/10/20 00:25 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I'm sorry it's taken a year to review this properly. Comments below ...
On 27/09/19 14:18 -0400, Daniel Lemire wrote:
(This is a revised patch proposal. I am revising both the description
and the code itself.)
Even on recent processors, integer
I'm sorry it's taken a year to review this properly. Comments below ...
On 27/09/19 14:18 -0400, Daniel Lemire wrote:
(This is a revised patch proposal. I am revising both the description
and the code itself.)
Even on recent processors, integer division is relatively expensive.
The current
This work-in-progress patch generalizes the malloc/free problem-checking
in -fanalyzer so that it can work on arbitrary acquire/release API pairs.
It adds a new __attribute__((deallocated_by(FOO))) that could be used
like this in a library header:
struct foo;
extern void foo_release (struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97297
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97279
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
I was notified that our P0634R3 (Down with typename) implementation has
a flaw: when we have an out-of-class member function definition, we
still required 'typename' for its parameters. For example here:
template struct S {
int simple(T::type);
};
template
int S::simple(/* typename
This avoids unnecessary instantiations of std::numeric_limits or
inclusion of when a more lightweight alternative would work.
Some uses can be replaced with __gnu_cxx::__int_traits and some can just
use size_t(-1) directly where SIZE_MAX is needed.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
*
From: Thomas Rodgers
This *should* be the correct patch this time.
Add support for -
* atomic_flag::wait/notify_one/notify_all
* atomic::wait/notify_one/notify_all
* counting_semaphore
* binary_semaphore
* latch
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/Makefile.am (bits_headers):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97300
Bug ID: 97300
Summary: [11 regression] several test cases fail after r11-3308
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89219
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||damian at sourceryinstitute
dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97295
--- Comment #3 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Poking at the crash to get clues:
"""
(gdb) bt
#0 internal_error (gmsgid=0x285ac9f "in %s, at %s:%d") at
../../gcc-10/gcc/diagnostic.c:1706
#1 0x01f7c34a in fancy_abort (file=0x20c3e90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97037
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Hi Michael,
On 2020-10-03 13:39, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
Hi Alex,
[...]
off_t would be great.
In case you are looking for some other candidates, some others
that I would be interested to see go into the page would be
fd_set
clock_t
clockid_t
and probably dev_t
Great!
off_t is
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* cp-tree.h (NON_UNION_CLASS_TYPE_P): Fix typo in a comment.
---
gcc/cp/cp-tree.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h b/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h
index c9ad75117ad..c7b5e7915ae
When adding new features to I included the required headers
adjacent to the new code. This cleans it up by moving all the includes
to the start of the file.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/std/numeric: Move all #include directives to the top
of the header.
*
> The 10/05/2020 17:28, Szabolcs Nagy via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > The 10/05/2020 12:52, Vaseeharan Vinayagamoorthy wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > After this patch, I am noticing that some glibc crypto tests get stuck in
> > > scanf which goes into busy loop.
> > >
> > > My build/host/target setup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96992
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97017
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 9/29/20 5:01 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > This patch fixes an "unguarded" call to coerce_template_parms in
> > build_standard_check: processing_template_decl could be zero if we
> > we get here during processing of the first 'auto' parameter of an
>
Ping?
Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho via Gcc-patches
writes:
> Replace them with a whitespace in order to avoid artifacts in the HTML
> document.
>
> 2020-08-19 Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho
>
> gcc/
> * doc/extend.texi (PowerPC Built-in Functions): Replace
> extraneous
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97298
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On 10/5/20 8:50 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
[Martin, as the original author of this pass, do you have any concerns?]
No concerns, just a few minor things.
This patch converts the -Wrestrict pass to use an on-demand ranger
instead of global ranges.
No effort was made to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97299
Bug ID: 97299
Summary: [11 regression] gcc.dg/vect/slp-reduc-3.c fails after
r11-3563
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95979
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> Maybe the issue is related to PR87711, where the optional KIND argument
> causes havoc with the elementalness of an intrinsic. (There it is LEN_TRIM).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97298
Bug ID: 97298
Summary: [11 regression] ICE at lto-streamer-out.c:554 after
r11-3303
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97297
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97297
Bug ID: 97297
Summary: typename wrongly required in out-of-class member
function definitions
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #4 from Bill Long ---
The customer has nuclear weapons. They do not do "bounty". :) Cray/HPE is
just the messenger. I think they would be happy with a plan for including the
routine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|IEEE_FMA is missing from|[F2018] IEEE_FMA is missing
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 at 01:15, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> The patch is borked, doesn't pass tests, fixing...
Unborked, ok for trunk if full testsuite passes?
2020-10-05 Ville Voutilainen
PR libstdc++/95904
* include/std/variant (__deduce_visit_result): Add a nested ::type.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97296
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97296
Bug ID: 97296
Summary: g++ accepts-invalid after DR2352 fix
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Will, Segher:
Add support for converting to/from 128-bit integers and 128-bit
decimal floating point formats.
The updates from the previous version of the patch:
Just a fix for the change log per Will's comments.
No regression failures were found when run on a P9.
Please let me know if this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97295
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Also fails on unpatched releases/gcc-10.2.0 built as:
"""
$ ${HOME}/dev/git/gcc-10-build/gcc/xg++ -B${HOME}/dev/git/gcc-10-build/gcc -v
Reading specs from /home/slyfox/dev/git/gcc-10-build/gcc/specs
Will, Segher:
This patch adds support for converting to/from 128-bit integers and
128-bit decimal floating point formats using the new P10 instructions
dcffixqq and dctfixqq. The new instructions are only used on P10 HW,
otherwise the conversions continue to use the existing SW routines.
The
Will, Segher:
Patch 4 adds the vector 128-bit integer shift instruction support for
the V1TI type.
The changes from the previous version include:
Fixed up the change log entry issues noted by Will.
Regression tests reran on Power 9 LE with no regression errors.
Please let me know if it looks
Will and Segher:
This is the rest of the second patch which adds the 128-bit integer
support for divide, modulo, shift, compare of 128-bit
integers instructions and builtin support.
In the last round of changes, the flag for the 128-bit operations was
removed. Per Will's comments, the
Will, Segher:
The following changes were made from the previous version:
Per Will's comments, I split the bug fix from patch 2 into a separate
patch. This patch is the bug fix for the vec_rlnm builtin.
Regression tests reran on Power 9 LE with no regression errors.
Please let me know if it
Will, Segher:
Patch 1, adds the 128-bit sign extension instruction support and
corresponding builtin support.
I updated the change log per the comments from Will.
Patch has been retested on Power 9 LE.
Pet me know if it is ready to commit to mainline.
Carl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97295
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 49309
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49309=edit
ICE-testcase-gcc-10.2.0.tar.gz
ICE-testcase-gcc-10.2.0.tar.gz contains two object files that seems to be
enough
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97295
Bug ID: 97295
Summary: ICE on firefox built with lto+pgo:
dist/include/mozilla/Casting.h:64:1: internal compiler
error: in to_frequency, at profile-count.c:273
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97123
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96910
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-10-05
Priority|P3
Hi!
Compiling the following testcase with -O2 -fopenmp:
int a[1][128];
__attribute__((noipa)) void
foo (void)
{
#pragma omp for simd schedule (simd: dynamic, 32) collapse(2)
for (int i = 0; i < 1; i++)
for (int j = 0; j < 128; j++)
a[i][j] += 3;
}
int
main ()
{
for (int
Hi Segher,
> On 3 Oct 2020, at 00:43, Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
>
> Hi Olivier,
>
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:30:55AM +0200, Olivier Hainque wrote:
>> This change reworks CPP_BUILTINS_SPEC for powerpc-vxworks to
>> prepare for the upcoming addition of 32 and 64 bit ports for
>> VxWorks
On 10/5/20 3:51 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
The walloca pass is a mess. It has all sorts of heuristics to divine
problematic ranges fed into alloca, none of them very good, and all of
them unreadable. The mess therein was actually one of the original
motivators for the ranger
> > > I wonder I can get the branch moved, so I can do the benchmarking :)
> > > Any suggestions how to do that?
>
> I just installed a small patch, hot-fix style which I am hoping will
> fix your problem. Can you try it? It passes the testsuite, so the change
> should be safe.
And now, the fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96805
--- Comment #9 from David Binderman ---
I see no progress on this bug for over a month now.
I'd be happy to help with testing.
Perhaps Jason is best placed to make progress on this bug.
The 10/05/2020 17:28, Szabolcs Nagy via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The 10/05/2020 12:52, Vaseeharan Vinayagamoorthy wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After this patch, I am noticing that some glibc crypto tests get stuck in
> > scanf which goes into busy loop.
> >
> > My build/host/target setup is:
> > Build:
The implementation of the functions __absv?i2(), __addv?i3() etc. for
trapping integer overflow provided in libgcc2.c is rather bad.
Same for __cmp?i2() and __ucmp?i2()
At least for AMD64 and i386 processors GCC creates awful to horrible
code for them: see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97279
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97197
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ac1c65ad1a16d83ec63674efa07c00b062562f15
commit r11-3659-gac1c65ad1a16d83ec63674efa07c00b062562f15
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020, H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches wrote:
> This email is generated by an automated script. Does GCC BZ have
> an email gateway?
Bugzilla has a REST API that you can use to interact with it via JSON
messages over HTTP. contrib/mark_spam.py has an example to mark bugs as
spam.
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/555019.html
On 9/28/20 4:01 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 9/25/20 11:17 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 9/22/20 4:05 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The rebased and retested patches are attached.
On 9/21/20 3:17 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Ping:
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/554893.html
On 9/25/20 12:58 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The C and C++ representations of zero-length arrays are different:
C uses a null upper bound of the type's domain while C++ uses
SIZE_MAX. This makes the middle end logic more
On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 9:09 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> The previous patch was not correct. This one should be.
>
> Ready for master?
I don't understand why this code uses symtab_indices_shndx at all.
There should only be one SHT_SYMTAB_SHNDX section. There shouldn't be
any need for the
The 10/05/2020 12:52, Vaseeharan Vinayagamoorthy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After this patch, I am noticing that some glibc crypto tests get stuck in
> scanf which goes into busy loop.
>
> My build/host/target setup is:
> Build: aarch64-none-linux-gnu
> Host: aarch64-none-linux-gnu
> Target:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 at 17:12, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> The implementation of the functions __absv?i2(), __addv?i3() etc. for
> trapping integer overflow provided in libgcc2.c is rather bad.
> Same for __cmp?i2() and __ucmp?i2()
>
> GCC creates awful to horrible code for them (at least for AMD64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96835
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Weinzierl ---
The full compilation error is
+ g++-10 -fopenmp -foffload=nvptx-none bug.cpp -o bug
ptxas /tmp/cc1XobxJ.o, line 253; error : Illegal operand type to instruction
'ld'
ptxas /tmp/cc1XobxJ.o, line 266;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96835
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Weinzierl ---
#include
#pragma omp declare target
template
struct vector {
int values_[sz];
vector();
vector(int const& init_val);
int dot(vector o) {
int res = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < sz; ++ i)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97285
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
The implementation of the functions __absv?i2(), __addv?i3() etc. for
trapping integer overflow provided in libgcc2.c is rather bad.
Same for __cmp?i2() and __ucmp?i2()
GCC creates awful to horrible code for them (at least for AMD64 and
i386 processors): see
Hi.
The previous patch was not correct. This one should be.
Ready for master?
Thanks,
Martin
>From a96f7ae39b5d56ce886edf1bfb9ca6475a857652 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Martin Liska
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 18:03:08 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] lto: fix LTO debug sections copying.
MIME-Version: 1.0
On 10/5/20 11:51 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
More changes from the ranger branch that been tested and retested,
including a full Fedora build.
These are cleanups so that multi-range union/intersect doesn't have to
deal with legacy code. Instead, these should be done in legacy mode.
OK
More changes from the ranger branch that been tested and retested,
including a full Fedora build.
These are cleanups so that multi-range union/intersect doesn't have to
deal with legacy code. Instead, these should be done in legacy mode.
OK pending new tests against trunk?
gcc/ChangeLog:
On 10/5/20 11:28 AM, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 11:51 +0200, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
wrote:
The walloca pass is a mess. It has all sorts of heuristics to
divine
problematic ranges fed into alloca, none of them very good, and all
of
them unreadable. The
On 10/5/20 10:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 09:39:01AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
My change to namespace-scope spell corrections ignored the issue that
different targets might have different builtins, and therefore perturb
iteration order. This fixes it by using an
Hi!
On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 09:56:01PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> Please excuse a comment from the gallery:
>
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2020, will schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-09-04 at 12:52 -0300, Raoni Fassina Firmino via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > +(define_expand
On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 11:51 +0200, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> The walloca pass is a mess. It has all sorts of heuristics to
> divine
> problematic ranges fed into alloca, none of them very good, and all
> of
> them unreadable. The mess therein was actually one of the original
>
And now with changelog entry :).
gcc/ChangeLog:
* range-op.cc (operator_div::wi_fold): Return varying for
division by zero.
(class operator_rshift): Move class up.
(operator_abs::wi_fold): Return [-MIN,-MIN] for ABS([-MIN,-MIN]).
(operator_tests): Adjust
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96914
avieira at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||avieira at gcc dot gnu.org
On 10/5/20 11:19 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
This patch imports three fixes from the ranger branch:
1. Fold division by zero into varying instead of undefined.
This provides compatibility with existing stuff on trunk.
2. Solver changes for lshift and rshift.
This should not affect anything on
Adding Ian (and Richi) to CC.
On 10/5/20 5:20 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
As seen in the PR, we get to situation where we have a big number
of symbols (~125K) and thus we reach .symtab_shndx section usage.
For .symtab we get the following sh_link:
(gdb) p strtab
$1 = 81997
readelf -S prints:
As seen in the PR, we get to situation where we have a big number
of symbols (~125K) and thus we reach .symtab_shndx section usage.
For .symtab we get the following sh_link:
(gdb) p strtab
$1 = 81997
readelf -S prints:
There are 81999 section headers, starting at offset 0x1f488060:
Section
On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 09:51:23AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 5:57 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 12:21:04PM -0700, sunil.k.pandey via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > On Linux/x86_64,
> > >
> > > c34db4b6f8a5d80367c709309f9b00cb32630054 is the first
This patch imports three fixes from the ranger branch:
1. Fold division by zero into varying instead of undefined.
This provides compatibility with existing stuff on trunk.
2. Solver changes for lshift and rshift.
This should not affect anything on trunk, as it only involves
the GORI solver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97294
Bug ID: 97294
Summary: ASAN "dynamic-stack-buffer-overflow" false positive
with OpenMP reduction to std::vector
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69090
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Should not this PR be closed?
Hi!
On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 11:09:11PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 01:50:24PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > + /* If reg parm stack space increases, we cannot sibcall. */
> > > + if (REG_PARM_STACK_SPACE (decl ? decl : fntype)
> > > + > REG_PARM_STACK_SPACE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97290
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
I've got a patch candidate for it.
std::allocator and std::pmr::polymorphic_allocator should throw
std::bad_array_new_length from their allocate member functions if the
number of bytes required cannot be represented in std::size_t.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* config/abi/pre/gnu.ver: Add new symbol.
*
[Martin, as the original author of this pass, do you have any concerns?]
This patch converts the -Wrestrict pass to use an on-demand ranger
instead of global ranges.
No effort was made to convert value_range's into multi-ranges.
Basically, the places that were using value_range's, and
Not exactly a patch ping, but I was hoping we could re-engage the discussion on
this and figure out how we can make POImode work for powerpc.
How does x86 solve this? There was some suggestion that it has some similar
situations?
Thanks,
Aaron Sawdey, Ph.D. saw...@linux.ibm.com
IBM Linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97293
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96805
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||furkanusta17 at gmail dot com
---
[ was: Re: [PATCH][omp, ftracer] Don't duplicate blocks in SIMT region ]
On 10/5/20 10:51 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2020, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
>> I've had to modify this patch in two ways:
>> - the original test-case stopped failing, though not the
>> minimized one, so I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97291
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Monakov ---
Reshuffling statements and piling up extra abstraction doesn't help solve the
core issue that GIMPLE passes can duplicate any basic block, but basic blocks
of SIMT loop epilogue should be protected from
1 - 100 of 187 matches
Mail list logo
