[Bug lto/86651] lto-wrapper.exe: fatal error: simple_object_copy_lto_debug_sections not implemented: Invalid argument

2018-07-24 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86651 U.Mutlu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||um at mutluit dot com --- Comment #1 from

[Bug tree-optimization/86622] [9 Regression] incorrect strlen of array of array plus variable offset

2018-07-21 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86622 --- Comment #5 from U.Mutlu --- I have to correct myself in #2 and #3. The code is correct, and should return n=6.

[Bug tree-optimization/86622] [9 Regression] incorrect strlen of array of array plus variable offset

2018-07-21 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86622 --- Comment #4 from U.Mutlu --- gcc version 4.9.2 (Debian 4.9.2-10+deb8u1) gives the same result as v9: p=123456 n=6

[Bug tree-optimization/86622] [9 Regression] incorrect strlen of array of array plus variable offset

2018-07-21 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86622 --- Comment #3 from U.Mutlu --- I just tested it with v9: #include static const char a[3][8] = { "1234", "12345", "123456" }; int main () { volatile int i = 1; const char* p = *([1] + i); int n = __builtin_strlen (p);

[Bug tree-optimization/86622] [9 Regression] incorrect strlen of array of array plus variable offset

2018-07-21 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86622 U.Mutlu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||um at mutluit dot com --- Comment #2 from

[Bug target/71045] [SH] gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O0 and -Os failures

2018-07-21 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71045 --- Comment #6 from U.Mutlu --- Another difference is: the passing normal compiler was built with itself (so to say, ie. built with v9), whereas the failing cross compiler was built with the default system compiler: $ gcc -v Using built-in

[Bug target/71045] [SH] gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O0 and -Os failures

2018-07-21 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71045 --- Comment #5 from U.Mutlu --- I just see a difference: Target: x86_64-linux-gnu Target: x86_64-linux The pr68264 fails in the latter case (built as a crosscompiler).

[Bug target/71045] [SH] gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O0 and -Os failures

2018-07-21 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71045 --- Comment #4 from U.Mutlu --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3) > (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #2) > > (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #1) > > > (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #0) > > > > Kaz, do you know what's

[Bug c/86377] extern int errno; is treated as buggy function declaration [-Werror=strict-prototypes]

2018-07-02 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86377 --- Comment #8 from U.Mutlu --- If one activates -Werror then it won't build as it then treats the warnings as error. And there are many warnings currently suppressed. That means -Werror is deactivated by default, and IMO never activated by any

[Bug c/86377] extern int errno; is treated as buggy function declaration [-Werror=strict-prototypes]

2018-07-02 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86377 --- Comment #6 from U.Mutlu --- The configure scripts in the subdirs/libs (like libiberty) do compile some test codes to populate the config.h of the subdir. And there the difference happens if -Wuninitialized is treated as error, ie. if user

[Bug c/86377] extern int errno; is treated as buggy function declaration [-Werror=strict-prototypes]

2018-07-02 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86377 --- Comment #5 from U.Mutlu --- The configure scripts in the subdirs/libs (like libiberty) do compile some test codes to populate the config.h of the subdir. And there the difference happens if -Wuninitialized is treated as error, ie. if user

[Bug c/86377] extern int errno; is treated as buggy function declaration [-Werror=strict-prototypes]

2018-07-02 Thread um at mutluit dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86377 --- Comment #3 from U.Mutlu --- As said in the Remarks, the bug originally was triggered in this file in the trunk: ../gcc_trunk/libiberty/pex-common.c:28 #include #ifdef NEED_DECLARATION_ERRNO extern int errno; #endif

[Bug c/86377] New: extern int errno; is treated as buggy function declaration [-Werror=strict-prototypes]

2018-07-02 Thread um at mutluit dot com
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: um at mutluit dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 44344 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44344=edit The output file of -save-temps

[Bug libitm/86294] New: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]

2018-06-23 Thread um at mutluit dot com
: normal Priority: P3 Component: libitm Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: um at mutluit dot com Target Milestone: --- If warnings are treated as error (I think that's the default, or gets implicitly activated if -Wall -Wextra has been given

[Bug libitm/86293] New: unused variable left over (used in assert) when building with -g0 -DNDEBUG [-Werror=unused-variable]

2018-06-23 Thread um at mutluit dot com
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libitm Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: um at mutluit dot com Target Milestone: --- when building the languages=c,c++ with "-g0 -DNDEBUG", then the following err