https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84015
Bug ID: 84015
Summary: [7/8 Regression] ICE with class template argument
deduction
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51677
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81611
--- Comment #18 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Vacations over, patches formatted and posted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg01994.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84010
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson ---
(In reply to James Clarke from comment #2)
> Here is a completely untested patch which should in theory resolve this
> series of issues. This doesn't introduce rematerialization for them (or, if
> it's su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84014
Bug ID: 84014
Summary: ICE in setup_min_max_allocno_live_range_point, at
ira-build.c:2762
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ra
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Trebbien ---
I have run into a small issue. C++11 apparently does not provide an exception
guarantee on vector::resize(size_type), whereas in C++14, the exception
guarantee is "If an exception is thrown other than by th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84012
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
In this context e has a non-dependent type as shared_ptr is a non-dependent
type and shared_ptr does not have a conversion to a*. So I don't see why
this should accepted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83921
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Jan 24 00:57:18 2018
New Revision: 257009
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257009&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2018-01-23 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/83921
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84010
--- Comment #2 from James Clarke ---
Created attachment 43230
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43230&action=edit
0001-sparc-Fix-modes-for-TLS-offsets.patch
Here is a completely untested patch which should in theory resolve th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56010
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #43227|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54185
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83998
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84010
--- Comment #1 from James Clarke ---
Elaborating slightly for those unfamiliar with SPARC TLS relocations:
Initial exec sequences normally look something like:
sethi %tie_hi22(foo), %r1
or%r1, %tie_lo10(foo), %r1
ldx [%l7+%r1], %r2,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83964
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
No, many other builtins are also problematic (there are a few more PRs open).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56010
--- Comment #6 from Peter Bergner ---
Created attachment 43227
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43227&action=edit
Proposed patch
I'm testing the attached patch, which should also fix PR83743. Can those of
you that have hit t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84013
Bug ID: 84013
Summary: wrong __restrict clique with inline asm operand
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
StyleFactory.cpp
namespace std {
template class shared_ptr {};
class a;
template class b {
a *g() const;
shared_ptr e;
};
template a *b::g() const { return e; }
}
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 8.0.1 20180123 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83987
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] ICE with |[6/7 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That would be welcome.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Yes, but that does not work if ivopts decides to make a loop that cannot
work with bdnz ;-)
cc:ing Bin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54613
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig ---
Created attachment 43226
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43226&action=edit
Patch which should not slow down things
This seems to be better from the timing perspective for
the library
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #7 from Michael Meissner ---
I think the thing to do is make a shorter loop that won't get extended like the
double loop does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
This is a twisty little passage (all different).
The code is basically trying to test the TARGET_ASM_LOOP_ALIGN_MAX_SKIP target
hook. It carefully aligns the functions to 16 bytes and then wants the norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #18 from Thomas Garnier ---
Ok. Opened: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84011
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84011
Bug ID: 84011
Summary: Optimize switch table with -fPIE
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83981
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Trebbien ---
I would like to make a patch for this and PR 83982 if that's okay.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner ---
I must have typed the wrong numbers, as revision 250482 is indeed the revision
that it breaks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83980
--- Comment #3 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #2)
> I'll see if I can find related bugs.
Comment #2 looks like a dup of pr48890.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61627
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Thomas Garnier from comment #16)
> Yes, I think you can't just default to the non-PIE mode.
>
> Clang does it well though:
>
> :
>0: 83 ff 16cmp$0x16,%edi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Garnier ---
Yes, I think you can't just default to the non-PIE mode.
Clang does it well though:
:
0: 83 ff 16cmp$0x16,%edi
3: 77 0f ja 14
5:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83992
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83980
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #2 from Harald An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83947
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Jan 23 21:23:53 2018
New Revision: 257000
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257000&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/83947 - ICE with auto declarations.
* pt.c (do_aut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83974
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83974
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jan 23 21:19:09 2018
New Revision: 256999
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256999&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++: Fix ICE in fold_for_warn on CAST_EXPR (PR c++/83974)
gcc/cp/Chang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Thomas Garnier from comment #14)
> Correcting what I said before, it is about re-enabling switch folding (or
> switch optimization).
>
> Basically without PIE (-fno-PIE) with -O2, a switch can be opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82207
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 08:53:36PM +, guez at lmd dot ens.fr wrote:
>
> This behaviour of gfortran is a problem because it prevents the use of qnan as
> a normal missing value and the debugging option at t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81443
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 regression]|[8 regression]
|build/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84010
Bug ID: 84010
Summary: [sparc64] Bad TLS code generation
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81443
--- Comment #18 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Jan 23 20:54:32 2018
New Revision: 256998
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256998&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/81443
* rtlanal.c (num_sign_bit_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82207
Lionel GUEZ changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guez at lmd dot ens.fr
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83988
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84002
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81082
--- Comment #9 from Marc Glisse ---
+ (if (! INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type)
Integer vectors satisfy this condition...
Also, floats need some check (I don't know which one is appropriate).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84009
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83987
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 23 20:36:34 2018
New Revision: 256997
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256997&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/83987
* tree.c (cp_free_lang_data): Change DE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84009
Bug ID: 84009
Summary: No diagnostic issued if the decl-specifier in the
decl-specifier-seq of a for-range-declaration is
register, static,or thread_local
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84008
Bug ID: 84008
Summary: [PDT] ICE accessing kind and len parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84007
Bug ID: 84007
Summary: ICE with same_type_as with CLASS entity
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #28 from Qing Zhao ---
>
> I don't think this is a good test. Repeatedly calling strcmp with the same
> inputs is not something real code does, especially when the string matches
> exactly. Why would it do that? The consequence is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84006
Bug ID: 84006
Summary: ICE in storage_size() with CLASS entity
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81550
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
It isn't actually subversion id 250482 that causes the problem. I've built
250481 and 250483 compilers and there is no difference in code. I had 252844,
and it shows the problem.
The difference between
);
template operator e::d, j, k>() const;
};
template
template
c::operator e::d, j, k>() const {
e::d, j, k> l = h::operator e::d, j, k>();
}
c a(c(2, 2));
f b(a);
}
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 8.0.1 20180123 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84005
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84005
Bug ID: 84005
Summary: [8 regression] gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-1.c etc. FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84004
Bug ID: 84004
Summary: [8 regression] gcc.dg/vect/vect-95.c XPASSes
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84004
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
-use-linker-plugin
-flto-partition=none execution test
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes10
# of unexpected failures4
/export/build/gnu/gcc-test/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xg++ version 8.0.1 20180123
(experimental) (GCC)
make[1]: Leaving directory '/export/build/gnu/gcc-test/build-x86_64-linux/gcc'
[hjl@gnu-skx-1 gcc]$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81038
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc*-*-*|powerpc*-*-*, i?86-*-*,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84002
Bug ID: 84002
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE with template conversion operator
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83905
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Jan 23 19:30:32 2018
New Revision: 256996
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256996&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
i386: Use const reference of struct ix86_frame to avoid copy
We ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83866
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Garnier ---
Correcting what I said before, it is about re-enabling switch folding (or
switch optimization).
Basically without PIE (-fno-PIE) with -O2, a switch can be optimized to be:
:
0: b8 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83866
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jan 23 19:13:10 2018
New Revision: 256995
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256995&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-23-01 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/83866
* decl.c (gfc_ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Garnier ---
Created attachment 43223
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43223&action=edit
testcase for switch folding
No switch folding if built with:
$CC -O2 -fno-PIE -c -o switch ./switch.c
Swit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83898
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jan 23 19:10:48 2018
New Revision: 256994
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256994&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-23-01 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/83898
* trans-stmt.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83950
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merril
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83926
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Does this work on GCC 7 (obviously without -mno-fold-gimple)? If so, please
mark as [8 regression] in title.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Thomas Garnier from comment #11)
> I think for this file using only -mcmodel=large makes more sense.
>
> Given the proposed option (-fstatic-pie) is not kernel specific, the TLS is
Sounds reasonable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83989
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82303
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Garnier ---
I think for this file using only -mcmodel=large makes more sense.
Given the proposed option (-fstatic-pie) is not kernel specific, the TLS is not
needed. What do you think about disabling optimization like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
--- Comment #27 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to Qing Zhao from comment #23)
> qinzhao@gcc116:~/Bugs/78809/const_cmp$ cat t_p.c
> #include
>
> char array[]= "fishi";
>
> #define NUM 10
> int __attribu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84001
Bug ID: 84001
Summary: ICE in dependent_type_p cp/pt.c:23567 when using
member type of template parameter in template list
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83399
--- Comment #14 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Tue Jan 23 18:18:25 2018
New Revision: 256993
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256993&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Back port from mainline
2018-01-10 Peter Bergner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809
Qing Zhao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #42449|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83935
--- Comment #5 from Pierre-Marie de Rodat ---
I just submitted an Issue/Comment on dwarfstd.org, but unfortunately it is not
yet publicly visible (http://dwarfstd.org/Issues.php). Waiting for feedback
from there…
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84000
Bug ID: 84000
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in replace_loop_annotate, at
tree-cfg.c:352
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83999
--- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz ---
Please note that a result with "type" instead of "class" gives :
$ cat z2.f90
program p
type t
integer :: a
end type
type(t) :: x(3)
x = f()
print *, x
contains
elemental function f(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83999
Bug ID: 83999
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:10233
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83998
Bug ID: 83998
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_intrinsic_dot_product,
at fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:4403
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59298
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #9 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83976
--- Comment #3 from G. Steinmetz ---
A class/type issue - changing x from class to type :
$ cat z3.f90
program p
type t
integer :: a
end type
type(t), allocatable :: x
type(t) :: z = t(3)
x = z
z = (x)
print *, z
end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83997
Bug ID: 83997
Summary: ICE with alias template and attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, lto
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83989
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83992
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Ugh, the testcase works on x86 solely due to the fact that combine merges:
(insn 12 11 14 4 (parallel [
(set (reg:DI 87 [ ivtmp_1 ])
(plus:DI (reg:DI 87 [ ivtmp_1 ])
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81616
--- Comment #51 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Andrew Roberts from comment #50)
> with the matrix.c benchmark on Ryzen and looking at the other options when
> using -march=znver1 and -mtune=znver1
>
> mult took 225281 clocks -march=znver1 -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82258
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|pault at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83996
Bug ID: 83996
Summary: [6/7/8] Regression] ICE with zero-sized array
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83906
--- Comment #11 from Pedro Alves ---
Running the testcase under valgrind and current gdb master I see:
==6118== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
==6118==at 0x4C35CB0: bcmp (vg_replace_st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83496
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83991
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> #c0 says that clearly, just use -march=silvermont.
> The first dump with these "Invalid sum of" messages is the vect dump.
Sorry for overlooking that ;)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83991
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82604
--- Comment #18 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Tue Jan 23 16:47:03 2018
New Revision: 256990
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256990&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/82604
* tree-loop-distribu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70895
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vries at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83992
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83991
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83993
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The clang++ error on e is:
pr83993-2.C:5:22: error: constexpr variable 'e' must be initialized by a
constant expression
constexpr const int *e = &a[10];
^ ~~
pr83993-2.C:5:27: note:
1 - 100 of 195 matches
Mail list logo
