https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100111
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31447dcaf15c37e5b9c42b2984f4c8b649fe9b74
commit r10-9730-g31447dcaf15c37e5b9c42b2984f4c8b649fe9b74
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99767
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1730b5d6793127b1a47970f44d60da8082bab514
commit r10-9729-g1730b5d6793127b1a47970f44d60da8082bab514
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:06d50ebc9fb2761ed2bdda5e76adb4d47a8ca983
commit r10-9728-g06d50ebc9fb2761ed2bdda5e76adb4d47a8ca983
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99905
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c965254e5af9dc68444e0289250c393ae0cd6131
commit r10-9727-gc965254e5af9dc68444e0289250c393ae0cd6131
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4ac7483ede91fef7cfd548ff6e30e46eeb9d95ae
commit r10-9726-g4ac7483ede91fef7cfd548ff6e30e46eeb9d95ae
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:91e076f3a66c1c9f6aa51e9d53d07803606e3bf1
commit r10-9725-g91e076f3a66c1c9f6aa51e9d53d07803606e3bf1
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99849
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2e57bc7eedb084869d17fe07b538d907b8fee819
commit r10-9724-g2e57bc7eedb084869d17fe07b538d907b8fee819
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98601
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e68ac8c2b46997af1464f2549ac520a192c928b1
commit r10-9723-ge68ac8c2b46997af1464f2549ac520a192c928b1
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99859
--- Comment #20 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e961da38630c892dfc0723e0726b6a0b0833e951
commit r10-9722-ge961da38630c892dfc0723e0726b6a0b0833e951
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99863
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7a2f91d413eb7a3eb0ba52c7ac9618a35addd12a
commit r10-9721-g7a2f91d413eb7a3eb0ba52c7ac9618a35addd12a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97653
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8642b73a0f0df1f8e1e2d2102d67a76f8ed0a255
commit r10-9720-g8642b73a0f0df1f8e1e2d2102d67a76f8ed0a255
Author: Jakub Jelinek
On 20/04/2021 08:54, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> Hi GCC developers,
>
> just to further clarify why I think the current Steering Committee is highly
> problematic,
> I'd like you to give a look at this commit
> message over Linux MAINTAINERS
>
>
Pushed after Jakub's confirmation. We do not coordinate major release with FSF.
Martin
---
htdocs/releasing.html | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/releasing.html b/htdocs/releasing.html
index d51d6fc7..cb7bb5fe 100644
--- a/htdocs/releasing.html
+++
FWIW, I agree with Martin. Source files with lots of tests make
finding things difficult. For example, value-range.cc has 400 lines
of tests (which I wrote ;-)). Even though these tests have proven
invaluable in finding bugs, they make navigating the source file
cumbersome.
Aldy
On Tue, Apr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
Starting git bisect ...
On 19/04/21 12:23 -0700, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
namespace __detail
{
-using __platform_wait_t = int;
-
-constexpr auto __atomic_spin_count_1 = 16;
-constexpr auto __atomic_spin_count_2 = 12;
-
-template
- inline constexpr bool __platform_wait_uses_type
#ifdef
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Sandiford
> Sent: 19 April 2021 20:34
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Richard Earnshaw ; Kyrylo Tkachov
>
> Subject: [PATCH] Adjust guality xfails for aarch64*-*-*
>
> This patch gives clean guality.exp test results for aarch64-linux-gnu
> with
Pushed as obvious to master (and releases/gcc-11 branch).
Martin
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/invoke.texi: Document new param.
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index 8b70fdf580d..a1b50406048 100644
---
Hi Tobias,
Thanks. Commit r11-8255-g67378cd63d62bf0c69e966d1d202a1e586550a68.
By the way, I did check that there were no problems with pdt_26.f03
reported by valgrind, given the decrease in the malloc count.
Cheers
Paul
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 14:08, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100145
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|ipa |gcov-profile
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100144
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Sollve_vv's testcase has been fixed:
Issue: https://github.com/SOLLVE/sollve_vv/issues/324
Patch test_parallel_master_taskloop.c:
https://github.com/SOLLVE/sollve_vv/pull/325
Patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100145
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |ipa
Keywords|
On IBM Z the aliasing stores are realized through one element vector
instructions, if no cost model for vectorization is used which is the
default according to vect.exp. Fixed by changing the number of times
the pattern must be found in the dump.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Created attachment 50634
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50634=edit
x86_64 object module
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100112
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |ipa
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100150
Bug ID: 100150
Summary: ice in bp_unpack_string
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100113
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99960
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-20
Ever confirmed|0
Obviously the dude was not Eric Raymond, because he would have sent the
IBM Fuckhead an appropriate reply. These are the developers at IBM,
who after being watched by the IBM Panopticon, they obey!
Now repeat after me,
"Whenever I hear the voice say,
'Now, listen to me, ' I will obey."
"When I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61259
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.3.0, 4.4.0
CC|
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 at 04:47, Frosku wrote:
>
> On Mon Apr 19, 2021 at 4:06 PM BST, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
> > Google doesn't pay anybody to work on GCC all day. You know nothing
> > about
> > GCC or the "problems" you're complaining about. Your input to this
> > conversation is not constructive.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95983
--- Comment #4 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Hi Patrick,
thank you for that patch. I guess that it also fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96070.
Will this patch be backported to gcc-10?
Great work!
> Here the relevant excerpt (but please go chech the quotation):
>
> "As an IBM employee, you are not allowed to use your gmail account to work
> in any way on VNIC. You are not allowed to use your personal email account
> as a "hobby". You are an IBM employee 100% of the time.
> Please remove
On 4/20/21 9:17 AM, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
> Depending on whether GCC is configured using --with-mode=zarch or not,
> for the 31bit target instructions are generated either for ESA or
> z/Architecture. For the sake of simplicity and robustness test only for
> the latter by adding
Depending on whether GCC is configured using --with-mode=zarch or not,
for the 31bit target instructions are generated either for ESA or
z/Architecture. For the sake of simplicity and robustness test only for
the latter by adding manually option -mzarch.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
*
On 4/16/21 3:59 PM, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> checking for an osc break is somewhat brittle especially with many
> passes potentially introducing new insns and moving them around.
> Therefore, only run the test with -O1 -fschedule-insns in order to limit
> the influence of other passes.
Yeah,
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 9:40 PM Michael Meissner via Fortran
wrote:
>
> Fix Fortran rounding issues, PR fortran/96983.
>
> I was looking at Fortran PR 96983, which fails on the PowerPC when trying to
> run the test PR96711.F90. The compiler ICEs because the PowerPC does not have
> a floating
Hi GCC developers,
just to further clarify why I think the current Steering Committee is highly
problematic,
I'd like you to give a look at this commit
message over Linux MAINTAINERS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100110
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:67378cd63d62bf0c69e966d1d202a1e586550a68
commit r11-8255-g67378cd63d62bf0c69e966d1d202a1e586550a68
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100106
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Yes, indeed something like the following seems to fix the issue:
diff --git a/gcc/simplify-rtx.c b/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
index d13c390..56271e9 100644
--- a/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
+++ b/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
@@
301 - 340 of 340 matches
Mail list logo
