https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85412
--- Comment #19 from Arseny Solokha ---
Fixed for x86_64 on all supported branches for more than two years now. Is it
fixed for IA64 too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85940
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, Even clang has the same bug:
https://godbolt.org/z/fszxdGrsv
:3:19: warning: use of GNU address-of-label extension
[-Wgnu-label-as-value]
return (bool()) && x;
^
:3:10: error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98845
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha ---
gcc-12.0.0-alpha20210530 snapshot (g:a0a7adeea31918deefb053a9a15257af94aecfaf)
compiles the testcase w/o ICE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100282
--- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha ---
g++-12.0.0-alpha20210530 snapshot (g:a0a7adeea31918deefb053a9a15257af94aecfaf)
rejects the testcase w/o ICE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70519
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
My bet it is due to --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs which does not get
as tested any more.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40516
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48387
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99842
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df4e0359dad239854af0ea9eacb8e7e3719557d0
commit r12-1127-gdf4e0359dad239854af0ea9eacb8e7e3719557d0
Author: Peter Bergner
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||merkert at comcast dot net
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39128
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Daniel Gibson from comment #6)
> Are you sure about this?
> I couldn't find much about floats (and nothing about legal transformations)
> in the C++ standard, and if it's in IEEE-754 it should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47297
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43624
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Gibson ---
Are you sure about this?
I couldn't find much about floats (and nothing about legal transformations) in
the C++ standard, and if it's in IEEE-754 it should be the same for C and C++,
right?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50794
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51783
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
The problem with the conversion that is suggested here is the addition if
changed into a signed type might have an undefined behavior when it comes to an
overflow.
It does not matter if it is used later
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52831
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Aurelien Buhrig from comment #2)
> Need more information about the bug?
> Any comment about the provided patch?
Patches should be sent to gcc-patches@, I don't think this area has changed
since
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #5 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49055
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
Daniel Gibson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #4 from Daniel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70955
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marcus at jet dot franken.de
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45007
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
Daniel Gibson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Daniel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45185
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44985
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100839
Bug ID: 100839
Summary: -O2 does dangerous optimizations using FMA (please
don't break my cross product)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43979
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42367
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31850
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40108
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36837
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31170
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I think the volatile will block ifcvt from doing anything too.
The other thing is this thread safe for C++11/C11 memory models. That is does
cmpxchgq do a store always or only when the compare is true
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31170
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13756
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note libmudflap was removed back in 2014.
libgfortran is still there though.
Someone has to audit the comments here to figure out if there is anything else
to be done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30788
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95481
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28078
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||mingw
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100834
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||florian.bezdeka at siemens dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96187
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96160
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95891
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95967
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Created attachment 50891 [details]
> Start of the patch which should fix most of it
>
> This patch which should fix the majority of the problem though I have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95967
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95967
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95967
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
Hi,
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 11:18:20AM +0100, Philip Herron wrote:
> On 28/05/2021 04:05, Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote:
> > I tried building GCC Rust on ppc64le. With the attached patches,
> > "make check-rust" succeeds with:
> >
> > === rust Summary ===
> >
> > # of expected passes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95704
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95669
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95643
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95531
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95481
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95650
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Snapshot gcc-12-20210530 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/12-20210530/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 12 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
Hi Philip,
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 11:31:02AM +0100, Philip Herron wrote:
> As for the git hooks, is it possible that I amend the hooks within the
> gccrs repo .git/hooks folder? Or is this something i need to change in
> the GCC repo? Sorry i should really read up more on git hooks in general.
Actually quite a bit annoying, and searching for that document did not
success (and gave me the original link).
Pushed.
Gerald
commit a0a7adeea31918deefb053a9a15257af94aecfaf
Author: Gerald Pfeifer
Date: Mon May 31 00:27:17 2021 +0200
libstdc++: Remove "Intel Compilers" bibliography
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95685
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
With -funroll-loops on the trunk for the aarch64 target, I get no loop any
more:
bar and seems like good code:
.LFB0:
.cfi_startproc
and w1, w1, 65535
mov w2, 8193
tst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95632
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95714
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
TI's server has been telling us that "The PRU-ICSS wiki is in the
process of being migrated to software-dl.ti.com" for five months.
Time to pull the plug.
---
htdocs/readings.html | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/readings.html b/htdocs/readings.html
index
I pushed this based on a 301 (moved permanently) from
developers.redhat.com.
Nick, any plans to create a new Toolchain Update blog? :-)
Gerald
commit 47b1f39c5e4a31073311c48a51872ccf7bd51659
Author: Gerald Pfeifer
Date: Mon May 31 00:11:01 2021 +0200
wwwdocs: Nick's Blog has moved
On Sun, 30 May 2021, Tim Ehlers wrote:
> it's still the "FTP"-Server, even if we nowadays also allow different
> protocols (http/rsync) and also have ssl for http in place.
>
> But could you please change:
>
> Germany: https://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/misc/gcc/;>ftp.gwdg.de,
> thanks to emoe...@gwdg.de
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94331
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I have fixed the glaring mistake in PR94331.c, could you be so gentle
> as to test it to verify that it does indeed solve the problems you found?
The problem seems solved with the updated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100838
--- Comment #1 from Amir Kirsh ---
This main:
int main() {
MyString s1 = MyString{"Hello"}; // same also for rounded brackets
std::cout << __LINE__ << std::endl;
}
works as expected.
Output with C++14 and -fno-elide-constructors:
ctor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100838
Bug ID: 100838
Summary: -fno-elide-constructors for C++14 missing required
destructor call
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99022
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99454
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 99455 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99455
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99454
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98267
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98256
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ryan.burn at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98132
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94331
--- Comment #10 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa
---
Hi Dominique,
Thank you vary much for taking the time to test the patch.
If I understand you correctly the problem is on the test not on the patch
itself, right?
I have fixed the glaring
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94331
--- Comment #9 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa ---
Created attachment 50890
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50890=edit
Updated PR94331.c test file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93308
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93963
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97046
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94327
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90031
Will Wray changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wjwray at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100231
Will Wray changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wjwray at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100837
Bug ID: 100837
Summary: nds32le-linux: error: array subscript 2 is above array
bounds of 'rtx_def* [2]'
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On 5/5/2021 7:50 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi Eric, hi all,
currently, gcn (amdgcn-amdhsa) bootstrapping fails as Alexandre's
patch to __builtin_memset (applied yesterday) now does more expansions.
The problem is [→ PR100418]
(set(reg:DI)(plus:DI(reg:DI)(const_int))) [= "adddi3"]
This
On 5/11/2021 5:35 PM, H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches wrote:
Add TARGET_READ_MEMSET_VALUE and TARGET_GEN_MEMSET_VALUE to support
target instructions to duplicate QImode value to TImode/OImode/XImode
value for memmset. Define SCRATCH_SSE_REG as a scratch register for
ix86_gen_memset_value.
gcc/
On 5/23/2021 10:21 AM, Andrew Pinski via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 6:14 AM Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sun, 23 May 2021, apinski--- via Gcc-patches wrote:
+(for cmp (ge lt)
+/* x < 0 ? ~y : y into (x >> (prec-1)) ^ y. */
+/* x >= 0 ? ~y : y into ~((x >> (prec-1)) ^ y). */
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94331
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Easier to read warnings:
pr94331_1.f90:121:10: warning: type of 'checkb_o_ar' does not match original
declaration [-Wlto-type-mismatch]
121 | if(.not.checkb_o_ar(a, 0, ex-1))stop 28
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94331
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100836
Bug ID: 100836
Summary: microblaze-linux: RTX may be used uninitialized in
this function
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100835
Bug ID: 100835
Summary: defaulted equality gives wrong answer, if constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
hello
I was successfully able to build gcc with bootstrapping disabled and using xgcc
directly from the build directory instead ( reducing the overall build time a
lot, although it still takes about half an hour to build but it’s much faster
than before ). Also I was also able to run one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100834
Bug ID: 100834
Summary: False positive of -Wstringop-overflow= with -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100816
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100818
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-05-30
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100819
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100120
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100821
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100833
Bug ID: 100833
Summary: ranges::advance should return n when i == bound
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo