https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68905
Trent Reed changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||TReed0803 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70256
Bug ID: 70256
Summary: Add debug_varinfo and debug_varmap
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70293
--- Comment #2 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Created attachment 38020
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38020&action=edit
Proposed patch
Attached patch solves the issue by blocking AVX2's broadcast pattern
alternative: $r->Yi, which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70277
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
I only see a single try {} finally {} generated by the FE. It looks like
the remaining are generated by gimplification do be able to output CLOBBERs.
I think for large initializer lists it would be good to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70183
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70030
Vladimir Makarov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70261
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 17 08:01:26 2016
New Revision: 234279
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234279&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/70261
* rtlanal.c (replace_rtx): Revert 2016-03-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70280
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 17 23:00:04 2016
New Revision: 234312
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234312&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/70280
* c-typeck.c (composite_type): Don't count void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61198
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Mar 18 15:57:58 2016
New Revision: 234337
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234337&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport PR c++/61198 fix
gcc:
2014-12-19 Kai Tietz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70264
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Mar 17 18:27:47 2016
New Revision: 234303
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234303&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/70264: fix crash in compatible_locations_p with BUILTINS_LOCATION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70295
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Unfortunately that patch regresses the c-c++-common/nonnull-1.c testcase.
The problem is that finish_parenthesized_expr which sets TREE_NO_WARNING on all
expressions. Will see if setting it solely on MODIFY_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65362
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70261
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70232
--- Comment #4 from Arnd Bergmann ---
I've tried out a few more things as well, to see if the alignment of the struct
lpfc_name type or the builtin memcpy makes a different. Replacing the array of
eight bytes with a single uint64_t and scalar ope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70282
Bug ID: 70282
Summary: cc1plus hangs taking 100% CPU
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70139
--- Comment #5 from Viktor Ostashevskyi ---
Bisected to:
commit 9c96033c877975303250d6f6156eacba52fc8b44
Author: jason
Date: Mon Nov 17 18:16:14 2014 +
C++14 constexpr support (minus loops and multiple returns)
gcc/
* tree-inline.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70271
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 17 13:43:01 2016
New Revision: 234289
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234289&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-17 Richard Biener
PR debug/70271
* dwarf2ou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70284
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70139
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- constexpr.c.xx 2016-03-11 17:37:42.0 +0100
+++ constexpr.c 2016-03-18 18:35:11.302453270 +0100
@@ -1245,7 +1245,10 @@ cxx_eval_call_expression (const constexp
if (call_expr_nargs (t)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70251
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 17 Mar 2016, ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70251
>
> --- Comment #6 from Ilya Enkovich ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69879
Gabriel Ibarra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37887|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70269
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.4
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70251
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Ilya Enkovich from comment #2)
> Here is a responsible match.pd pattern:
>
> /* A + (B vcmp C ? 1 : 0) -> A - (B vcmp C), since vector comparisons
>return all-1 or all-0 results. */
Since we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70299
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Without libstdc++ dependencies:
inline long double pil(long double x, int n) { return __builtin_powil(x, n); }
inline long double pl(long double x, long double n) { return __builtin_powl(x,
n); }
int main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70106
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70150
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from H.J.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70255
Bug ID: 70255
Summary: change of the order of summation of floating point
numbers despite no-associative-math
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70273
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Or better yet decide whether to walk the initializers or not based on
> !gimple_body (fndecl) && !fun->cfg ?
or make the flag a tri-state and if we compute it b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70233
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> This patch leads to serious regressions. Do not
> yet understand why. Withdrawing...
Confirmed. Many failures are of the kind
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/array_constructor_type_16.f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70188
--- Comment #10 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Mar 17 22:55:38 2016
New Revision: 234310
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234310&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/70188
* config/pa/constraints.md: Revert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70288
--- Comment #1 from Andrey Tarasevich ---
Created attachment 38014
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38014&action=edit
test case with compile-time-hog
Same test case, but with line 28 removed (attached as test_case_2.i) takes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70297
--- Comment #1 from Piotr Zierhoffer ---
Created attachment 38023
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38023&action=edit
gcc -v output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70133
Andrew Roberts changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrewm.roberts at sky dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70147
--- Comment #30 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 18 15:31:35 2016
New Revision: 234335
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234335&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/70147 - handle primary virtual bases
* class.c (v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70285
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70290
Bug ID: 70290
Summary: -mavx512vl breaks parsing of C++ vector comparison
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70295
Bug ID: 70295
Summary: [6 Regression] bogus -Wnonnull-compare for
"dynamic_cast(this) != nullptr"
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70267
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70267
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Perhaps
--- gcc/cp/init.c.jj2016-03-05 07:46:50.0 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/init.c 2016-03-17 17:18:21.326917746 +0100
@@ -2872,6 +2872,14 @@ build_new_1 (vec **placemen
return error_mark_n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59407
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i386-pc-solaris2.1[01] |i386-pc-solaris2.1[012]
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70254
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69557
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70188
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70093
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60976
--- Comment #34 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Mar 18 15:58:03 2016
New Revision: 234338
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234338&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
allocator_traits> partial specialization
PR libstdc++/60976
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70256
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70139
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59950
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Last reconfirmed|2015-03-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70285
Bug ID: 70285
Summary: ICE on valid code on x86_64-linux-gnu: verify_gimple
failed
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70290
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-mavx512vl breaks parsing |-mavx512vl breaks parsing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70205
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70294
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70287
Bug ID: 70287
Summary: Slow compilation time
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70267
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70259
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70304
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
This looks like a disagreement between the Solaris assembler and the GNU
objcopy program. I don't know if there is anything that gccgo can do to fix
it. You should probably report this as a GNU binutils
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70301
Bug ID: 70301
Summary: missing diagnostic on taking the address of a
temporary
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70295
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The warning goes away without the "eHit &&" in the if condition.
And please note that the testcase was reduced from a big Libreoffice C++ file
with a larger class hierarchy.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70139
--- Comment #16 from Viktor Ostashevskyi ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> That option is not the default, and is only really useful for experimenting
> to understand how C++ works (as documented at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29854
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |FIXED
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
(In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70139
--- Comment #14 from Viktor Ostashevskyi ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> As for the priority, P2
> is right, we've already shipped GCC 5.[123] with this bug, so it can't be a
> release blocker, but is of course very much desir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70263
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Fri Mar 18 19:30:20 2016
New Revision: 234344
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234344&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/70263
* ira.c (memref_used_between_p):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66146
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The native handles are not required by the standard, whether they exist or not
is implementation-defined. If they're not supportable we'll remove them, that's
not a problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70113
--- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Fri Mar 18 13:58:32 2016
New Revision: 234330
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234330&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-03-18 Christophe Lyon
PR target/70113
* gcc.tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70304
Bug ID: 70304
Summary: 5.3.0 solaris: objcopy: errors.o: no group info for
section
.group%__go_pimt__I5_ErrorFrN6_stringeee__N18_errors.e
rrorString
Prod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70305
Bug ID: 70305
Summary: 5.3.0 solaris: ld: fatal: relocation error:
R_SPARC_DISP32: file
../src/c++11/.libs/libc++11convenience.a
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70305
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Paprocki ---
Created attachment 38028
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38028&action=edit
Modifications to configure
Example showing where the `-z relax=comdat` flag needed to be applied in the
gener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70238
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'm afraid so, I see nothing that can be done here, either you break the
experimental uses in 4.x by not changing anything, or you break
non-experimental gcc 5.x built code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70261
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70298
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
PR66146 is non-x86, whereas this fails on x86 too. It's possibly related
though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70133
--- Comment #9 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks for picking this up.
I agree we should keep track of the extensions implied by the architecture
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47931
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70014
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70245
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70205
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69043
Andris Pavenis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andris.pavenis at iki dot fi
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70264
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69043
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70235
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I have isolated to a block of code which is dead relative to our current
testsuite. Now to work on the solution.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70269
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vries
Date: Fri Mar 18 09:17:23 2016
New Revision: 234321
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234321&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Set dump_file to NULL in cgraph_node::get_body
2016-03-18 Tom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70293
--- Comment #3 from Kirill Yukhin ---
Regtest is in progress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70290
--- Comment #3 from Ilya Enkovich ---
In build_conditional_expr_1 we check if used condition is a result of another
VEC_COND_EXPR and then may just re-use condition of that VEC_COND_EXPR.
In that case we deal with boolean vector as a condition t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70139
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||robert-gcc at debian dot org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67114
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
>friend bool
>operator<(thread::id __x, thread::id __y) noexcept
> - { return __x._M_thread < __y._M_thread; }
> -
> + { return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70162
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo ---
Just out of curiosity ... what's with the 64 in rx_print_integer? Why do
numbers in that range need to be printed in decimal?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70286
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70263
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
In all the cases where we can have the store before the equiv we're in the
realm of undefined behavior AFAICT. But it's not clear to me that the equiv
will always be a self-referencing.
So your patch will
87 matches
Mail list logo
