https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #26 from Kevin Shekleton ---
Thanks for educating me on the numbering scheme, Segher. That's helpful info!
Florian - I see you requested the CVE. Will you be working to get the NVD entry
updated with the appropriate affected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #25 from Segher Boessenkool ---
There is no 9.2.1 release, and there will not be one either.
See https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html for how our numbering scheme works.
Very briefly, if the second number is 0, or the third number is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #24 from Kevin Shekleton ---
Thanks, Segher. You mentioned 9.3 -- does that mean there won't be a 9.2.1
release? If so, will the 'Known to work' field here be updated?
Also, will someone from the GCC team request an update to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #22)
> See https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html/timeline
Sorry, that should be https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html#timeline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #21)
> No future releases for GCC have been announced. Judging from historical
> trends the next (and last) GCC 7 release (7.5) will be in November, GCC 8
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #21 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It will be fixed in the next releases of all still supported branches
(that's GCC 7, 8, and 9), and also in the upcoming GCC 10 release of
course.
If you are in a hurry, you can build your own
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
Kevin Shekleton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kevin.shekleton at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0, 6.5.0, 7.4.1, 8.3.1,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #18 from Florian Weimer ---
I'm going to request a CVE ID for this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #17 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Sat Aug 31 19:01:52 2019
New Revision: 275245
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275245=gcc=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix darn-3.c for GCC 8 and GCC 7
Apparently I didn't properly test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #16 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Sat Aug 31 18:58:04 2019
New Revision: 275244
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275244=gcc=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix darn-3.c for GCC 8 and GCC 7
Apparently I didn't properly test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #15 from Jack Lloyd ---
Thanks for the fast fix and backporting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 30 14:25:36 2019
New Revision: 275186
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275186=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2019-08-23 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 30 14:23:55 2019
New Revision: 275185
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275185=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2019-08-22 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #11 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 30 14:17:20 2019
New Revision: 275182
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275182=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2019-08-23 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 30 14:15:39 2019
New Revision: 275181
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275181=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2019-08-22 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 30 13:53:11 2019
New Revision: 275176
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275176=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2019-08-23 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 30 13:51:26 2019
New Revision: 275175
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275175=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from trunk
2019-08-22 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Aug 23 22:19:40 2019
New Revision: 274889
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274889=gcc=rev
Log:
rs6000: New darn testcase (PR91481)
We used to implement darn with unspecs,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #6 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Aug 22 19:36:21 2019
New Revision: 274835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=274835=gcc=rev
Log:
rs6000: Use unspec_volatile for darn (PR91481)
Every call to darn should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Look in the gcc sources, under gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey Walton ---
Lloyd's finding can be confirmed on GCC135. For example,
gcc135:~$ /opt/at12.0/bin/gcc -O3 -mcpu=power9 -m64 darn.c -o darn
gcc135:~$ ./darn
9FBE0B8B6E861BD6
9FBE0B8B6E861BD6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91481
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
26 matches
Mail list logo
