|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2017-01-22
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|ICE in mangle_decl with LTO |[6/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77489
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Author: trippels
Date: Wed Jan 18 15:49:15 2017
New Revision: 244580
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244580&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77489 -- Reorganize abi warning check
PR c++/7748
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70182
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70182
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77489
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70182
--- Comment #13 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Author: trippels
Date: Wed Jan 18 08:49:11 2017
New Revision: 244567
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244567&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR70182 -- missing "on" in mangling of unresolved operators
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77489
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Author: trippels
Date: Wed Jan 18 08:40:05 2017
New Revision: 244566
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244566&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR77489 -- mangling of discriminator >= 1
libiberty:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79098
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Confirmed.
I also see it on ppc64le.
Started with r244465.
||2017-01-14
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|error: incorrect sharing of |[7 Regression] error:
|tree nodes |incorrect sharing of tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71190
--- Comment #12 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #11)
> Do you have still Markus the pre-processed source files available on the
> machine? Can you give me access?
No, I removed them some time ago.
But, as I w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78767
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78852
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #7 from Mark
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78767
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||igorr at il dot ibm.com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78852
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3)
> The testcase in Comment 1 doesn't ICE for me with trunk.
Yes, even the original testcase doesn't ICE anymore on trunk.
Would be good to know which revision
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #23 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Unfortunately vmakarov SPEC tester is currently stalled for most archs.
However it still works for POWER7 and here r244167 shows no effect.
https://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/spec2000.ibm-p730-05-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78973
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 40466
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40466&action=edit
unreduced testcase
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
r238991 breaks the ODR (pointed out by LTO bootstrap):
../../gcc/gcc/loop-invariant.c:100:8: warning: type ‘struct invariant
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
A Gentoo users emailed me the following mixed C/C++ LTO testcase:
markus@x4 /tmp % cat 1.ii
struct a {
a();
} b;
markus@x4 /tmp % cat 2.i
typedef
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78964
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #7)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
> > And the Linux kernel would not see these warnings anyway:
> >
> > Makefile:
> > 707 # These warnin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78973
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Summary|[7 Regressi
[-Wstringop-overflow=]
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78964
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78964
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
And the Linux kernel would not see these warnings anyway:
Makefile:
707 # These warnings generated too much noise in a regular build.
708 # Use make W=1 to enable them (see scripts/Makefile.build)
7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78964
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78931
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Not a gcc bug.
You can use the patch in
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=593980 or version 57,
where the issue was fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78929
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Closing as invalid.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78927
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78911
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> Can you see it also on trunk?
Yes, but only with -O3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78911
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
||2016-12-23
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to work||5.4.1
Summary|lto1: internal compiler |[6/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78901
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #5 f
||2016-12-22
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Component|c++ |middle-end
Summary|internal compiler error:|[7 Regression] ICE:
|verify_gimple failed|verify_gimple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78897
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Please notice that I've reduced this from a ICE on invalid posted on Reddit:
markus@x4 /tmp % cat const.ii
constexpr void *operator new(long unsigned int, void *where) { return where; }
class Optional
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78898
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
A very recent regression:
% cat nsIconChannel.ii
struct A
||2016-12-22
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
markus@x4 /tmp % cat const.ii
struct Optional {
constexpr Optional() : _dummy{} { _value = 1; }
union {
int _dummy;
int _value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78890
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Reddit user sjd96 reported the following issue:
% cat union.ii
int main() {
union {
int a;
int &b = a;
};
a = 1;
auto c = b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Yuan Pengfei from comment #5)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Yuan Pengfei from comment #2)
> > > (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
--- Comment #22 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to dhowe...@redhat.com from comment #21)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #20)
> > *** Bug 78879 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>
> Kernel bug or not, it shou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||coolypf at qq dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Yuan Pengfei from comment #2)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> > See discussion in PR72785.
>
> I am using GCC 6.2.1. Is it the same problem?
Yes, I think so. The com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78879
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
All supported gcc versions are affected:
markus@x4 ~ % cat Util.ii
namespace {
void foo() {}
}
markus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78861
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> No, that will convert the stream to a bool then try to bitshift it.
>
> It should be:
>
>result = bool( iss >> t.duration >> t.width );
Yeah, sorry
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78861
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to mgans...@alice.de from comment #2)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-6/porting_to.html
>
> I am not a software developer, could you please tel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78047
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78047
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78047
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Casey at Carter dot net
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78841
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #6 from Mark
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78841
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78853
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
See: http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/x86-64-abi-0.99.pdf
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-6/porting_to.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78852
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Please run your code with -fsanitize=undefined before opening bugs in the
future.
See PR65709 for an explanation.
||2016-12-18
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Original testcase ICEs with all supported gcc versions.
Here is a small testcase that only ICEs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78749
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The patch looks good to me. Would you mind posting it to the list?
Thanks.
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to K from comment #0)
> Created attachment 40358 [details]
> .ii file
>
> I created a c++14 program to implement lazy eva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78419
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at uplinklabs dot net
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78844
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2016-12-17
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Component|other |target
Summary|target_clones causes|[6 Regression
||2016-12-17
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
ENOATTACHMENT
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
gcc-4.9 isn't supported anymore and optimize should only be used for debugging
purposes.
Use the build system instead and pass -fno-lto
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
They invoke undefined behavior by using misaligned accesses, see:
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11831
It was fixed once, but they dropped
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78772
--- Comment #10 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
When in doubt you could use -fno-strict-aliasing.
And sorry, but this is not the right place to discuss the aliasing rules of the
standard.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
trippels@gcc2-power8 linux % cat sm_ftl.i
int sm_read_sector_zone;
int *sm_read_sector_buffer = &sm_read_sector_zone;
int sm_read_sector() {
__builtin_memset(sm_read_sector_buffer, 0, 1);
again:
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77553
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charles.frasch at gmail dot com
--
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 77553 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78795
--- Comment #10 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
You can find that directory by:
% echo "int main(){}" | g++ -x c++ - && strace nm 2>&1 | grep bfd-plugins
On my system:
% ls -l /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/binutils-bin/lib/bfd-plugins/
total 8
lrwxr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78795
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #8)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #7)
> > And no, it is not a libtool issue. You can use your systems binutils just
> > fine, just add a symli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78795
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #6)
> Hmm... I can see the changes in the GCC 4.9 release notes. Something not
> obvious (the last time I had tested LTO was with GCC 4.8). And I would have
> e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78795
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78795
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Also make sure that nm, ar and ranlib use the liblto_plugin,
by either using wrappers (gcc-ar, etc.) or setting up a symlink
to the plugin in lib/bfd-plugins/.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78795
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69953
--- Comment #23 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #22)
> I get the same kind of errors with "make check" for GMP 6.1.1 by using GCC
> 6.2.1 and LTO (-flto=jobserve -fuse-linker-plugin), e.g.
>
> /tmp/ccZvS3pG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909
--- Comment #41 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #40)
> Created attachment 40316 [details]
> infinite d_print_comp printing protection
>
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #39)
> > Mark, could you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909
--- Comment #39 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Mark, could you please post your path to gcc-patches?
Then there might be a chance to get it into binutils before 2.28 gets released.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78774
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78772
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to ma.jiang from comment #4)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #3)
> > Please no.
> > There are many other cases where optimizations could introduce issues that
> > you will not
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Please no.
There are many other cases where optimizations could introduce issues that you
will not notice when you compile without warnings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78720
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
*** Bug 78769 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Dmitry Babokin from comment #2)
> I've used r243504, the latest available on git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
Yes, the git s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72861
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
,
||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Most likely r243419.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78749
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
This warning happens a lot when compiling LLVM (for friend operators).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78749
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
% cat t.ii
namespace {
template struct A {
friend void foo() {}
};
struct C : A {};
}
% g++ -Wall -c t.ii
||2016-12-08
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Confirmed with -fstack-protector:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78720
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78720
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
P0145R3 says that function arguments are indeterminately
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78720
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bonzini at gnu dot org
Co
601 - 700 of 3500 matches
Mail list logo
