https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79945
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79944
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
I've shutup that bug with dest = NULL, but then I immediately got this:
BUG: KASAN: global-out-of-bounds in clear_bit
include/linux/bitops_compiler.h:15 [inline]
BUG: KASAN: global-out-of-bounds in dma_chann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79945
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
If it works, even better.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79945
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ---
It's already present in system.ads so it should.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79945
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79930
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> If dot_product (matmul (...), ..) can be implemented more optimally (is
> there a blas/lapack primitive for it?) then the best course of action is to
> pattern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79816
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72783
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to felix from comment #4)
>
> By the way: in my report, I suggested making -Wformat-security enable this
> warning. Will -Wformat-length be implied by -Wformat-security?
I think the role of -Wforma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79946
Bug ID: 79946
Summary: Suboptimal code with AVX2 copying all arguments to
stack
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79946
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 40917
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40917&action=edit
Assembly output for ifort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79834
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 7 19:07:44 2017
New Revision: 245959
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245959&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/79834
c/
* c-parser.c (c_parser_pragma): Use error_at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79912
Palmer Dabbelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||palmer at dabbelt dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79785
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79896
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerhard.steinmetz.fortran@t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79776
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79912
mpf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|mpf at gcc dot gnu.org |palmer at dabbelt dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79834
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79944
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Created attachment 40918
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40918&action=edit
reproducer2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79944
--- Comment #4 from Dmitry Vyukov ---
Attached second minimized reproducer.
Build it with:
gcc dmaengine2.c -fsanitize=address -O2 -lasan -g
It produces:
==57662==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: unknown-crash on address 0x00601321 at pc
0x0040
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79912
Andrew Waterman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew at sifive dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79947
Bug ID: 79947
Summary: [6/7 Regression] ICE in rs6000_emit_swsqrt at
gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c:37570
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79899
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Same happens on ppc64-linux-gnu target:
$ ppc64-linux-gnu-g++
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other/friend5.C -Os
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79484
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79936
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #30 from Jonathan Wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79946
--- Comment #2 from Adam Hirst ---
Just for clarification: is this only occuring for the case where one does
Dx = D%x
tmp = matmul(NU,Dx);
tensorproduct%x = dot_product(tmp,NV)
or is it also applicable to
tmp = matmul(NU,D%x);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79948
Bug ID: 79948
Summary: _Pragma(“GCC error”) is processed differently inside
and outside of a #if directive
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79936
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
After spending some more time debugging this I don't think it's a bug in the
warning after all. The ICE comes and goes with different arguments to
-Walloc-size-larger-than. It's as if the block the pointer p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79484
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Using LOC is not the right way to do these things. You should use bind(c) on
the fortran side.
I think you can google help with this.
Power8 systems are less forgiving then others. I dont get any errors on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64236
--- Comment #5 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Still reproducible on gcc-7 (r243972).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79916
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
There's how I created the cross-compiler:
$ configure --target=ppc64le-linux-gnu
--with-as=/usr/bin/powerpc64le-suse-linux-as --disable-bootstrap
$ ppc64le-linux-gnu-g++ -v
...
gcc version 7.0.1 201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79949
Bug ID: 79949
Summary: ICE in Max. number of generated reload insns per insn
is achieved (90)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79950
Bug ID: 79950
Summary: G++ cannot detect simple off by one error in STL
classes
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79916
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Btw. GCC 5 and GCC 6 work fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79949
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Same happens here:
$ s390x-linux-gnu-gcc
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/builtin-arith-overflow-p-19.c
-O2
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/built
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79916
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt ---
I also have trouble reproducing this. Rather than the g++ commandline, please
post what is passed to cc1plus.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79936
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79951
Bug ID: 79951
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2311 on ppc64le with
-mno-cmpb
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79916
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
That's strange, cc1plus command line has nothing special as I can see:
$
/home/marxin/BIG/buildbot/slave/install/gcc-dda535fd9490e3e8f31bacc6678e0c734ff59212/bin/../lib/gcc/ppc64le-linux-gnu/7.0.1/cc1plus
-q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952
Bug ID: 79952
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE in test_loading_cfg in
read-rtl-function.c:2016 targeting for
hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79953
Bug ID: 79953
Summary: ICE in expand_debug_locations when attribute target is
used
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79942
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79501
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79954
Bug ID: 79954
Summary: [C++17] Explicit deduction guide not rejected when
defined outside inline namespace enclosing the type
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79952
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Removing --enable-checking=all from the set of configure options or replacing
it with --enable-checking=release allows the build to complete.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71543
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79928
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79948
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I have not read the standard in this area but I know somethings are interesting
in this area that most folks won't expect. Inside #if undefined macros are
considered as 0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79948
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79936
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|diagnostic |patch
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79928
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78939
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Last reconfirmed|2016-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79928
Chung-Ju Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jasonwucj at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79945
Pavel Zhukov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pavel at zhukoff dot net
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70549
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79484
--- Comment #4 from smateo ---
Hi Jerry,
This code is a simplification of a code that our tool generates to support a
tasking programming model. I know that I don't need a derived type to call a C
function. If I recall correctly, I needed to rep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79955
Bug ID: 79955
Summary: GLIBC build fails after r245840
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78939
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Has there been any resolution for the GB20 vs. LWG2446 conflict in Kona?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79867
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Santos ---
Minor correction: LD_LIBRARY_PATH is used to resolve lib names when dlopen() is
called, but not for load-time linking.
There are also a few other complications on Cygwin. DLLs (including libgcc)
are stored
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79484
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79940
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'll fix this, that said the testcase certainly is not OpenMP compliant, you
have a data race in there, you need to do the taskloop just once, or make sure
that in each thread it will write to different array
101 - 162 of 162 matches
Mail list logo
