https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48200
--- Comment #42 from Xi Ruoyao ---
I just sent a patch making symver attribute "really" useful for LTO.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01162.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92968
Bug ID: 92968
Summary: C style struct initialization fail to compile in g++
when initializing array fields
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91052
--- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha ---
I cannot reproduce it anymore as of r279405.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92967
Bug ID: 92967
Summary: ICE in matching_typebound_op, at
fortran/interface.c:4214
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92966
Bug ID: 92966
Summary: Segfault on defaulted operator== with wrong return
type
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92965
Bug ID: 92965
Summary: "note: 'x' is not public" emitted even when no error
is emitted
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92495
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61339
--- Comment #15 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #14)
The patch that implements -Wmismatched-tags is still in review. Here's the
latest: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01154.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
Hongyu Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92651
--- Comment #9 from liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Dec 17 01:50:35 2019
New Revision: 279452
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279452=gcc=rev
Log:
Add abs pattern to handle {si,di} mode abs to avoid pmax/cmove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88739
--- Comment #63 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note match.pd has a similar bug. Here is the patch which fixes it:
diff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd
index 92b93b0..8607abe 100644
--- a/gcc/match.pd
+++ b/gcc/match.pd
@@ -5676,16 +5676,18 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
--- Comment #6 from liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Dec 17 01:29:09 2019
New Revision: 279451
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279451=gcc=rev
Log:
Use add for a = a + b and a = b + a when possible.
Since except for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91165
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Dec 16 23:25:08 2019
New Revision: 279447
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279447=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/91165 - verify_gimple ICE with cached constexpr.
It seems we need
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92859
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Dec 16 23:23:43 2019
New Revision: 279446
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279446=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/92859 - ADL and bit-field.
We also need unlowered_expr_type when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92210
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92952
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92956
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92952
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92952
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Mon Dec 16 22:24:15 2019
New Revision: 279445
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279445=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/92952 - gfortran.dg/lto/pr87689 FAILs at -O2
gcc/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92963
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
> p cannot be q as they cannot be based on each other based on my reading of
> 6.7.3.1p3.
Perhaps something like that was intended at some point but I don't see it in
the text. Until you start
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92964
Bug ID: 92964
Summary: order of base class members generates vastly different
code
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92963
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Take:
if (p == q)
r = p;
else
r = q;
p cannot be q as they cannot be based on each other based on my reading of
6.7.3.1p3.
Therefore r is only ever based on q.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91651
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
$ gcc -std=c11 test.c && ./a.out
2
$ gcc -std=c11 -O3 test.c && ./a.out
1
--
gcc x86-64 version: gcc (GCC) 10.0.0 20191216 (experimental)
--
Ok,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92962
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92826
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to kim.walisch from comment #0)
> GCC should definitely not warn when using constants from . GCC
> should also provide an option to disable these warnings (e.g.
> -Wno-non-standard-suffix).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92826
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, easyhack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92479
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92392
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, easyhack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92962
Bug ID: 92962
Summary: Documentation: x86 Options - znver2 missing RDPID and
WBNOINVD
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92956
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 47508
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47508=edit
-fdump-tree-strlen dump of gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/lto/pr87689_*.f
As requested, the output of:
$ gfortran-trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92209
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92961
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92961
Bug ID: 92961
Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_zero_size_array, at
fortran/arith.c:1680
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92885
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #2 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92210
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43361
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tangyixuan at mail dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92956
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> -Wstringop-overflow is a C-family only option that shouldn't be enabled for
> Fortran. It took some effort to make it work that way […] I wouldn't be
> surprised
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92960
Bug ID: 92960
Summary: ICE tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl
minimal' structure, have 'component_ref' in
add_decl_as_local, at fortran/trans-decl.c:261
Product:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92118
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85002
--- Comment #5 from G. Steinmetz ---
Please note that switching to a test-version (configured with
--enable-checking=yes) allows further reduction to another branch :
$ cat z7.f90
program p
type t2
integer, allocatable :: b(:)
end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85002
--- Comment #4 from G. Steinmetz ---
Update, ICEs also with a scalar component "a" :
$ cat z2.f90
program p
type t
integer, allocatable :: a
end type
type t2
type(t), allocatable :: b(:)
end type
type(t) :: x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91839
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92959
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91820
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92959
Bug ID: 92959
Summary: ICE in gfc_conv_associated, at
fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:8634
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90275
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92952
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92952
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92958
Bug ID: 92958
Summary: [10 regression] gfortran.dg/lto/pr87689_0.f fails
starting with r279392
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92957
Rafael Avila de Espindola changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|9.2.1 |10.0
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92956
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
-Wstringop-overflow is a C-family only option that shouldn't be enabled for
Fortran. It took some effort to make it work that way (see pr80545 for the
background) and there's no test for it so either the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92955
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92957
Bug ID: 92957
Summary: gcc produces a duplicated load, clang doesn't
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92956
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to myself from comment #0)
> regression in (all?) OpenMP 'target' offloading compilation testing, for
> example with 64-bit nvptx:
;-) This "all" here means (presumably?) all different offload
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92956
Bug ID: 92956
Summary: 'libgomp.fortran/examples-4/async_target-2.f90'
offloading compilation regression
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92676
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor ---
I proposed a fix on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg01129.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88335
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Not working on this further.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92745
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Potential fix:
--- gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -6408,11 +6408,11 @@ reshape_init_r (tree type, reshape_iter *d, bool
first_initializer_p,
/* For a nested compound literal, there is no need
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92955
Bug ID: 92955
Summary: [10 regression] gcc.dg/vect/pr60505.c fails starting
with r279392
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88335
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Also note the update_vtable_entry_for_fn changes (except the formatting one)
were done just in desperate attempt to avoid various ICEs, I'm afraid I have no
idea what would need to be done to diagnose
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88335
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Testcase for pmf (incomplete, guess the non-pmf calls should be converted too):
struct S {
constexpr S () : s (0) {}
virtual int foo () const { return 42; }
consteval virtual int bar () const { return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88335
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 47506
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47506=edit
gcc10-wip-consteval-virtual.patch
I've tried to make further progress on this, and while simple testcases like
those
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92948
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92953
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
At least then GCC should try to use cmovno instead of seto-test-cmove for
if-conversion:
foo:
movl%edi, %eax
subl%esi, %eax
notl%eax
orl $1, %eax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66120
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83441
Boldizsar Palotas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||boldizsar.palotas@continent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92606
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
For the time being, -fno-ipa-icf-variables might do as a work-around.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92932
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92953
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #2)
> Well, the aarch64 backend does not implement subv4 pattern in the
> first place, which would be required for efficient branchy code:
>
> foo:
> subs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
Filippo Portera changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |WORKSFORME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92953
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov ---
Well, the aarch64 backend does not implement subv4 pattern in the first
place, which would be required for efficient branchy code:
foo:
subsw0, w0, w1
b.vc.LBB0_2
mvn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> NOTE yes there is a missing -Wshadow warning, I will file it in a second.
PR92954
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #11 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #9 from Filippo Portera ---
Fixed!
Thanks a lot!
Il giorno lun 16 dic 2019 alle ore 12:28 pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> ha scritto:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
>
> --- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
Filippo Portera changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92954
Bug ID: 92954
Summary: -Wshadow does not report when a struct member shadows
a global
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
NOTE yes there is a missing -Wshadow warning, I will file it in a second.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #6 from Filippo Portera ---
Created attachment 47505
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47505=edit
implementation file
where I would like to use the training variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #5 from Filippo Portera ---
Created attachment 47504
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47504=edit
include file
where training is declared as extern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #4 from Filippo Portera ---
Created attachment 47503
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47503=edit
main file
where training is defined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92953
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92953
Bug ID: 92953
Summary: Undesired if-conversion with overflow builtins
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92357
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
One possibility would be to make sure that for lto_stream_offload_p
get_partitioning_class never returns SYMBOL_DUPLICATE, because for
lto_stream_offload_p only ->offloadable nodes are selected for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92952
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92952
Bug ID: 92952
Summary: [10 regression] gfortran.dg/lto/pr87689 FAILs at -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92893
--- Comment #4 from Stephan Bergmann ---
(FWIW, the amount of cases where this issue hits the build of LibreOffice seems
to have increased further with more recent GCC trunk builds after I filed the
issue.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92946
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #2 from Filippo Portera ---
I printf the variable dimensions both in the main() that in:
void MeanSquaredError::Backward(
int begin, int batch_size,
const InputType&& input,
const TargetType&& target,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Is the printf before or after main?
If before, then the problem is the order of variables initialized from
different translational units is unspecified and therefore undefined.
If after, then maybe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92951
Bug ID: 92951
Summary: extern variable declaration doesn't behave properly
for me
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92950
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Mon Dec 16 08:03:28 2019
New Revision: 279410
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279410=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR92950: Wrong code emitted for movv1qi
The backend emits 16 bit memory
95 matches
Mail list logo
